SAS INFRAENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), CUTTACK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 163/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 May 2026AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment order was passed without proper jurisdiction as it predated the notification authorizing the NFAC. Consequently, the assessment order was found to be invalid and quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an assessment order passed by the NFAC. The assessment order was passed on February 23, 2022, prior to the notification granting NFAC powers to pass such orders, which was issued on March 29, 2022.

What were the issues?

The key issue was the validity of an assessment order passed by the NFAC before the notification granting it the necessary powers was issued.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “HYBRID COURT AT CUTTACK”

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Sarangi, AR
For Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 26.05.2026Pronounced: 26.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “HYBRID COURT AT CUTTACK” BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.163/CTK/2026 Assessment Year: 2016-17 SAS Infraengineering Pvt. ITO, WARD-1(1), Cuttack Ltd. Vs At Plot no.1241/41, NUA Bazar, Mahandi Vihar, Cuttack-753004. (PAN: AAPCS0091R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri S. K. Sarangi, AR Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 26.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.NFAC/2015- 16/1064054 dated 22.12.2025.

2.

Shri S. K. Sarangi, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was the submitted by the ld. AR that the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act has been passed by NFAC on 23.02.2022. It was the submission that the notification has been issued on 29.03.2022

giving powers to NFAC to pass assessment order. It was the submission that jurisdiction for the NFAC to frame faceless assessment was notified from 29.03.2022 vide notification no. 18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022- TPL(Part), the said notification reads as under:

3.1 It was the submission that as the assessment order has been passed before the date of notification, the assessment order is liable to be quashed.

4.

In reply, the ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the assessment order has been passed by NFAC on 23.02.2022 whereas the notification authorizing the NFAC to pass assessment order was issued on 29.03.2022. Consequently, the assessment order has been passed on 23.02.2022 before the effective date of notification i.e. 29.03.2022 is found to be invalid and consequently quashed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Cuttack, the 26th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 26.05.2026. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →