AMARDEEP,JHAJJAR vs. ITO,WARD-1, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1213/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 March 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA (Accountant Member)7 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 notices issued to the wrong address suffered from an "incorrigible defect," rendering the subsequent assessment order under Section 143(3) invalid. Since the jurisdictional foundation of the notice failed, the entire assessment order based on it collapsed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, after changing its address from Delhi to Jhajjar, Haryana, had duly informed the department and the updated address was reflected in departmental records and filings. However, the Income Tax Officer initiated reassessment proceedings by issuing notices under Section 147 read with Section 148 to the assessee's old Delhi address.

What were the issues?

Whether reassessment notices issued to an incorrect address, despite the department being aware of the updated address, render the subsequent assessment order invalid for jurisdictional insufficiency.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 142(1)

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, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11.03.2025Pronounced: 21.03.2025

This appeal by Assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [for short hereinafter referred to as the [“Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 21.01.2024 for Assessment Year 2012-13.

ITA No.- 1213/Del/2024 Amardeep 2. Form 36 appended with the appeal memo indicates that the assessee has assailed the order of Ld. First appellate Authority both on legal grounds as well as on the merits of the additions. Thus, grounds of appeal no. 1-3 are legal grounds regarding the jurisdictional insufficiency of the Ld. AO in invoking proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s 148 of the case and grounds of appeal no. 4-5 are challenging merits of the addition. As, grounds of appeal no. 1-3 are legal grounds regarding the jurisdictional insufficiency of the Ld. AO and they lie at the base of the controversy, the same are examined first.

3.

The ld. Council of the assessee submitted that the entire controversy seminal to the grounds of appeal no. 1-3 are legal grounds regarding the jurisdictional insufficiency of the Ld. AO emanates from the fact that the Revenue, inspite of seized of the incontrovertible fact that the assessee was based out of Jhajjar, Haryana, had issued Notices u/s 147 r.w.s 148 in its case at its Dwarka Delhi address. It was submitted that as the notices per se were sent on the wrong address and hence suffering fromjurisdictional insufficiency, the corresponding assessment

ITA No.- 1213/Del/2024 Amardeep order u/s 143(3) would not survive. In support of his argument the Ld. Council has filed detailed paper book evidencing a plethoraof documents indicating that department was suitably and timely informed of its Jhajjar, Haryana. The Ld. Council for the assesseehas submitted that long ago it had its address as “MIG 353 GF3, PH-II, Pocket-B, Sec-18, Dwarka 110075, delhi”. The Ld.

Council for the assessee submitted that subsequently the assessee shifted its base to “VPO Chimni 855, TECH Beri district Jhajjar, Haryana 124103”. The Ld. Council for the assessee submitted that the impugned new address is evidenced in form 26AS for AY 2010- 11, AY 2011-12, AY 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 etc. (page 3-14 of paper book), The Ld. Council has submitted that return of income for AY 2012-13 was filed on 1/8/2019 with above Jhajjar address (page 36 of paper book). The Ld. Council has submitted that in the approval accorded by Ld. CIT dated 24.03.2019 to reopen its case also the Revenue has shown its Jhajjar address (page 92 of the paper book). The Ld. Council has argued that in spite of these clear fact, notice u/s 148 was issued at its “MIG 353

ITA No.- 1213/Del/2024 Amardeep GF3, PH-II, Pocket-B, Sec-18, Dwarka 110075, delhi” (page 1 of the paper book).

4.

It is the case of the assessee that its assessment for AY 2011-

12 was conducted on 27.11.2018 at its Jhajjar address (page 32,33 of the paper book). The Ld. Council has submitted that, the AO to correct his mistake, during the assessment proceedings issued notice u/s 142(1) dated 29.07.2019 at its Jhajjar address. The Ld.

Council submitted that during the assessment proceedings it had challenged the proceedings on the wrong address, which were overruled (page 66 of the paper book). The assessee furnished a screenshot of the ITD qua issue of the notice u/s 148 to show that there was no mention of its Jhajjar address. The Ld. Council placed reliance inter alia upon a catena of the judgements including Dart

Infra Build Pvt. Ltd. 460 ITR 532& Chetan Gupta 382 ITR 613

(Delhi high court) as well as Rajiv Gupta ITR No. 1166/del/2024 of this tribunal, holding that assessment orders based on notices issued on wrong address cannot survive. The Ld. Council submitted that in view of these facts the order of Ld. First Appellate Authority is not based upon correct and understanding to appreciation of the ITA No.- 1213/Del/2024 Amardeep facts of the case and hence deserves to be set aside. The Ld.

Council has requested for quashing the assessment order u/s 143(3), resting upon such defective Notices u/s 147 r.w.s 148.

5.

The Ld. DR vehemently argued in favour of the order of Ld. Assessing officer and its affirmation by Ld. CIT (A). It was submitted that assessee is non filer and therefore AO’s action cannot be faulted. The Ld. DR produced screenshot of some whatsappchats to suggest that notices were also issued on the Jhajjar address.

Accordingly, request was made to dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

6.

We have heard * rival ■ submissions material available on the records. Evidences available on the record clearly suggest that the change the address from delhi to Dwarka was timely and appropriately not only conveyed to the department but also evidenced from departments own records. Thus, we find sufficient force in the argument of the assessee that the notice u/s 147 r.w.s

148 issued to it suffers from incorrigible defect of having been sent on wrong address. We are unable to subscribe to the argument of Ld. DR that a simultaneously notice issued on the Jhajjar address

ITA No.- 1213/Del/2024 Amardeep would rescue its case. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that as the notice 147 r.w.s 148 issued to assessee suffers from incorrigible defect of having been sent on wrong address, the consequent assessment order u/s 143(3) cannot survive. When the foundation being the notice 147 r.w.s 148 fails, the super structure being the assessment order u/s 143(3) would also collapse. We, therefore, set aside the order of lower authorities and quash the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147/148, dated 23.12.2019. The grounds of appeal 1-3 raised by the assessee is allowed.

7.

In so far as other grounds of appeal no. 4-5 on merits, they

have become academic since the asseesseesucceeds on jurisdictional issue.

8.

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →