AVIAN REMEDIES LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 3(4), DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessment framed by the ITO was not sustainable in law due to the lack of a proper/valid Section 143(2) notice. The assessment order was quashed.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return declaring 'NIL' income. The assessment was framed by the ITO, Ward-3(4), Delhi, but the Section 143(2) notice was issued by the ACIT, Circle-3(2), Delhi.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the validity of the assessment proceedings due to the jurisdiction of the issuing authority for the Section 143(2) notice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
आदेश / ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi’s order in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1088175145(1), dated 31.03.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case filed perused. 2. Coming to first and foremost legal issue between the parties herein, a perusal of the case file indicates that the assessee had filed its return of income on 07.11.2020 declaring “NIL” income. Learned counsel next invites
ITA 5236/DEL/2026 AVIAN REMEDIES LTD
the tribunal’s attention to CBDT’s landmark instruction No.1/2011 that in “metro” cities, the ITOs have jurisdiction to assess a corporate return declaring income upto of Rs.30 lakhs, whereas, it was the ACIT, Circle-3(2), Delhi, who issued section 143(2) notice dated 21.09.2018 in its case (pages 26 to 27). This clinching factual position has gone unrebutted from the Revenue side. 3. Faced with this situation, the tribunal is of the considered view that the impugned assessment framed in the assessee’s hands dated 17.12.2019 by the learned ITO, Ward-3(4), Delhi is not sustainable in law for want of a a proper/valid section 143(2) notice. The same stands quashed in very terms. All other remaining pleadings between the parties on merits stands rendered academic. 4. The assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th July, 2026.
Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31st July, 2026. f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Padu Paraja vs. The Comnr. Of CT. And GST, OdishaOrissa · 2 Nov 2026
- Sanatan Bal vs. The Comnr. Of CT. And GST, OdishaOrissa · 2 Nov 2026