M/S S.P ENTERPRISES,JAMSHEDPUR vs. DCIT, JAMSHEDPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 33/RAN/2016Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 May 2018AY 2007-085 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment orders were bad in law and void ab-initio, following precedents from the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court. Consequently, the reassessment orders were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's reassessment orders for AY 2007-08 and 2008-09 were passed without issuing a notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law due to this omission.

What were the issues?

Whether reassessment orders passed without issuing a notice under Section 143(2) are valid. The key issue is the procedural requirement of issuing a notice under Section 143(2) before completing a reassessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 147,Section 148,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Poddar/Devesh Poddar, ARs
For Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, JCIT
Hearing: 29/05

Heard together (4 matters)

ITA No.33/Ran/2016
ITA No.40/Ran/2016
ITA No.43/Ran/2016
ITA No.44/Ran/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.33/Ran/2016: Assessment Year: 2007-2008 ITA No.40/Ran/2016: Assessment Year: 2008-2009

M/s. S.P.Enterprises, 55, Vs. DCIT, Range-3, Jamshedpur Mahto Para Road, Jugsalai, Jamshedpur PAN/GIR No. AATFS 9150 L (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

ITA No.43/Ran/2016: Assessment Year: 2007-2008 ITA No.44/Ran/2016: Assessment Year: 2008-2009

M DCIT, Range-3, Vs. M/s. S.P.Enterprises, 55, Jamshedpur Mahto Para Road, Jugsalai, Jamshedpur PAN/GIR No. AATFS 9150 L (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by: S/Shri S.K.Poddar/Devesh Poddar, ARs Revenue by : Shri P.K.Mondal, JCIT

Date of Hearing : 29/05/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 30 /05/ 2018

O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM These are cross appeals filed by the assessee and revenue against the

separate orders of the CIT(A) Jamshepdur both dated 27.11.2015 for the

assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, respectively.

2 ITA No .33 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .40 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009 ITA No .43 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .44 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009

2.

The revised Ground No.3 of appeal for both the assessment years is as

under:

“3. For that no notice u/s.143(2) was issued even after written communication regarding submission of return. As a matter of fact, communication to the return filed in response to notice u/s.147 was communicated on 22.1.2013 when the appellant representative appeared in response to notice u/s.142(1).”

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the original return of

income for assessment year 2007-08 on 15.11.2007. Later on, notice under

section 148 was issued to the assessee on 28.3.2012, which was served on

the assessee on 29.3.2012. The ld A.R. of the assessee vide its letter dated

22.3.2013 submitted that the original return filed may be treated as the

return filed in response to notice u/s.148 of the Act.

4.

Similarly, for the assessment year 2008-09, the assessee filed the

original return of income for assessment year on 30.9.2008. Later on,

notice under section 148 was issued to the assessee on 28.3.2012, which

was served on the assessee on 29.3.2012. The ld A.R. of the assessee vide

its letter dated 22.3.2013 submitted that the original return filed may be

treated as the return filed in response to notice u/s.148 of the Act.

5.

The contention of the assesee is that notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was

never issued and served on the assessee. Therefore, the reassessment

3 ITA No .33 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .40 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009 ITA No .43 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .44 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009

orders dated 25.3.2013 passed u/s.144/147 of the Act for the assessment

year 2007-08 and dated 26.3.2013 passed u/s.147/144 for the assessment

year 2008-09 are bad in law and, therefore, liable to be quashed. Ld A.R.

furnished the Xerox copy of order sheets of the Assessing Officer for the

assessment year 2007-08 and 2008-09, wherein, it is noted on 20.3.2013

that notice is issued to the assessee regarding proceedings under section

144 of the Act.

6.

For this proposition, ld A.R. of the assessee relied on the decision of

Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indus Towers Ltd vs DCIT, (2017) 82

TAXMANN.COM 430 (Del), wherein, it was held as under:

“Issue of notice 143(2)- Assessing Officer picked up assessee’s return for scrutiny assessment and issued notice under section 148-Assessee informed that revised return filed under section 139(5) was to be considered as return filed in response to notice under section 148. Thereafter, Assessing Officer without issuing notice under section 143(2) passed reassessment order under section 148. Later, a notice under section 143(2) was issued but after expiry of limitation period prescribed for issuance of such notice- Whether reassessment notice under section 148 as well as order pursuant to said notice was to be quashed-Held Yes.” 7. On the other hand, ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities.

8.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials

available on record. The undisputed facts of the case are that no notice

under section 143(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961 was issued to the

assessee before completing the reassessment u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the

4 ITA No .33 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .40 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009 ITA No .43 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .44 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009

assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 vide order dated 25.3.2013 and

26.3.2013, respectively.

9.

We find that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indus Towers

Ltd(supra) has quashed the reassessment notice u/s.148 of the Act,

wherein, it has been held as under:

““Issue of notice 143(2)- Assessing Officer picked up assessee’s return for scrutiny assessment and issued notice under section 148-Assessee informed that revised return filed under section 139(5) was to be considered as return filed in response to notice under section 148. Thereafter, Assessing Officer without issuing notice under section 143(2) passed reassessment order under section 148. Later, a notice under section 143(2) was issued but after expiry of limitation period prescribed for issuance of such notice- Whether reassessment notice under section 148 as well as order pursuant to said notice was to be quashed-Held Yes.” 10. We also find that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT & Anr.

Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362 (SC) has held that completion of

assessment under Section 158BC of the Act without issuance of notice

under Section 143(2) of the Act within prescribed time was wholly without

jurisdiction and void ab-initio. Respectfully following the decisions quoted

above, we hold the reassessment orders passed in pursuance to this notice

u/s.148 of the Act is also bad in law. We, therefore, cancel the reassessment

order dated 25.3.2013 passed u/s.144/147 of the Act for the assessment

year 2007-08 and dated 26.3.2013 passed u/s.147/144 for the assessment

year 2008-09 and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee.

5 ITA No .33 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .40 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009 ITA No .43 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2007 -2008 ITA No .44 / Ran /201 6: A sse ssment Ye ar: 2008 -2009

11.

As we have quashed the reassessment orders passed u/s.147 of the

Act while deciding Ground No.3 of the appeal of the assessee, the other

grounds of appeal of the assessee on merits of additions have become

infructuous and not adjudicated upon.

12.

In view of our decision in assessee’s appeal, the appeals filed by the

revenue are dismissed.

13.

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the

appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed..

Order pronounced in the open court on 30 /05/2018 Sd/- sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (N.S Saini) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ranchi; Dated 30 /05 /2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant: M/s. S.P.Enterprises, 55, Mahto Para Road, Jugsalai, Jamshedpur 2. The respondent: DCIT, Range-3, Jamshedpur 3. The CIT(A), Jamshedpur 4. Pr. CIT, Jamshedpur 5. DR, ITAT, Ranchi BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PS, ITAT, CAMP AT RANCHI

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →