ASAVRI SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 40(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 400/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 December 2021AY 2011-122 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel, under instructions, stated that they did not wish to press the grounds of appeal. The ITAT, in view of this submission, dismissed the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2011-12. The grounds of appeal raised concerned the CIT(A)'s authority to direct the Assessing Officer to issue a notice under section 148 and the applicability of limitation provisions.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the CIT(A) exceeded his jurisdiction by directing the issuance of a notice under section 148 and if such a notice would be barred by limitation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 251(1)(a),Section 150(1),Section 150(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT

For Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.12.2021Pronounced: 06.12.2021

ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)- 14, New Delhi, dated 09/08/2019 pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

“1. Because, the “CIT(A)” has exceeded his authority and jurisdiction as conferred upon him under section 251(1)(a) of the Act in directing the Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 148 of the Act, as appearing at para 5.2.3 of the appeal order dated 09.08.2019.

2. Because the directions given to the Assessing Officer in the appeal order are wholly uncalled for and extraneous in deciding the appeal/ subject matter of appeal before him and the same are liable to be quashed.

3. Because, the “CIT(A)” has erred in law and on facts in holding that in view of provisions of section 150(1) and (2), the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act to the other person will not be barred by limitation. 4. Because the order appealed against is contrary to the principles of natural justice.”

2.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that he does not raise to press the grounds of appeals. Ld. Dr has no objection.

3.

Heard the ld. Representative of the parties, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated that under the instruction of the assessee, he does not wish to press the grounds of appeal. Considering the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed.

Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 6th December, 2021.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →