M M CONSTRUCTIONS,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AKOLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 372/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 June 2026AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the impugned order of the NFAC did not demonstrate that any notices were issued to the assessee. The Tribunal also noted that the notice under Section 148 was issued to an email address with which the assessee had no connection.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the NFAC without any indication of notices being issued or an opportunity of hearing being provided. The assessee argued that notices were sent to an incorrect email address, making the reassessment proceedings invalid.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 and the opportunity of hearing provided to the assessee during the reassessment proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

For Appellant: Shri Dipesh Nagdeo, CA
Hearing: 11.06.2026Pronounced: 15.06.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 23/09/2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14.

2.

On hearing both the sides, we find that the impugned order has been passed by NFAC, wherein the appeal was dismissed as the impugned order of NFAC does not show if any notices were issued to the assessee. Ld. Counsel had demonstrated that in Form–35, assessee had provided e–mail address and mentioned that the notices be not served by e–mail. The impugned order of NFAC is silent as to if any opportunity of hearing was given to the assessee. It further comes up that the assessee raised specific ground that the notice issued under Section 148 and proceedings thereafter under Section 147 are bad in law and Ld. Counsel has demonstrated before us that the notice dated 22.03.2021 under Section 148 was issued on the e–mail ID of some person named ‘chandakumalkar@gmail.com’. .

3.

Ld. Counsel has submitted that all notices during assessment were issued on the same e–mail address with which assesse had no concern. Since it is a case of reopening under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Act wherein assessee had failed to file return also subsequent to notice under Section 148, the issue of service and of the notice under Section 147/148 of the Act is of a vital consequences.

4.

In the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances, we set aside the impugned orders and restore the issues to the files of Ld. Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open Court on 15.06.2026 Sd/– Sd/– ANUBHAV SHARMA KHETTRA MOHAN ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Nagpur: Dated: 15/06/2026 Z.U, P.S.

Copy to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order

Sr.PS/PS ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →