ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. SATVINDER KAUR, DELHI

The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal/National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Ld. CIT (A)’/NFAC for short] dated 13/02/2024 for the Assessment Year 2016-17.

The grounds of Appeal

Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) are that, the Assessee filed return declaring total income of Rs. 14,44,890/-. The case of the Assessee was reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short), an assessment order came to be passed u/s 147 r.w. Section 144B of the Act on 30/03/2022 by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 3,41, 07,059/- as against returned income of Rs. 14,44,890/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 01/03/2022, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 13/02/2024, allowed the Appeal of the Assessee on the ground that there was no valid service of notice u/s 148 of the Act within the prescribed time limit. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 13/02/2204, the Revenue preferred the present Appeal.

The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the Appeal of the Assessee on the ground that there was no valid service of notice u/s 148 of the Act within the prescribed time limit. Further submitted that, the Ld. CIT(A) ignored the fact that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 31/03/2021 was duly issued through ITBA to the Assessee within prescribed time limit, therefore, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous, thus sought for allowing the Appeal.

Per contra, the Ld. Assessee's Representative submitted that the notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 31/03/2021 has not been served on the Assessee either on the ITBA Portalor on Assessee’s e-mail id or physically. Further submitted that the Assessee had viewed the ITBA portal only on 5th July, 2021, therefore, it cannot be construed that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act has been served within the limitation prescribed. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the said contention of the Assessee has also been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) and found that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act was invalid and accordingly, quashed the assessment order. Therefore submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) requires no interference at the hands of the Tribunal. The Ld. Assessee's Representative relying on the order of the Ld. CIT(A),sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is the specific contention of the Assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) that the notice u/s 148 of the Act has been signed digitally by the A.O. on 31/03/2021 at 7.02PM, however, the said notice has not been served on the Assessee either on the ITBA Portalor on Assessee’s e-mail id or in physical mode. The Assessee has claimed to have viewed the ITBA Portal only on 5th July, 2021 thus, it cannot be said that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act has been duly served on the Assessee well within the limitation prescribed. The Ld. CIT(A) while adjudicating the said contention of the Assessee held as under:-

During the proceedings before us, the Ld. Departmental Representative sought for report from Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer replied to the Ld. Departmental Representative stating that ‘as per ITBA System the notice u/s 148 of the Act was not sent to the Assessee via e-mail, the physical record regarding service of notice are still not traced’. Considering the above said reply by the A.O., on hearing the both the parties, we reserved the order by giving two weeks time to the Ld. Departmental Representative to file the evidence regarding service of notice if any. However, the Ld. Departmental Representative has not placed any document for proof service of valid notice issued u/s 148 of the Act to the Assessee.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.