Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order involving reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment itself.
Held
The Tribunal held that the reassessment was invalid due to the non-issuance of a mandatory Section 143(2) notice. Therefore, the impugned reassessment was quashed.
Key Issues
The core issue was the validity of the reassessment proceedings due to the alleged lack of a mandatory Section 143(2) notice, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Asstt. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon.
Sections Cited
147, 143(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057181473(1), dated 18.10.2023 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges at the outset that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned reassessment itself framed on 31st March, 2022 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-68(5), Delhi for want of issuance of section 143(2) notice in light of Asstt. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon, (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). We make it clear that there is no material either in the case records or in the assessment order, as the case may be, which could indicate the learned assessing authority to have issued its above mandatory notice after filing of the assessee’s return. This being the clinching factual position, we hold in light of the above case law that the impugned assessment framed by the learned Assessing Officer is non-est in the eyes of law. The same is directed to be quashed in very terms therefore.