SANDIP KUMAR KESHARI,ASANSOL vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), ASANSOL

PDF

ITA 349/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 March 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)5 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The assessee did not file a return of income for AY 2017-18, leading to reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 by issuing a Section 148 notice on 24.03.2021. The assessee subsequently filed a return on 01.03.2022, during a period extended by the Supreme Court due to COVID-19. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 147 read with Section 144B, making additions for unexplained money, but failed to issue a mandatory notice under Section 143(2) after the return was filed.

Held

The Tribunal held that the issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory for the Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction once a return was filed in response to a Section 148 notice. Since no such notice was issued, the assessment framed without it was deemed invalid, void ab initio, and without jurisdiction, and could not be cured by Section 292BB.

Key Issues

Whether the assessment framed under Section 147 read with Section 144B is valid when the Assessing Officer failed to issue a notice under Section 143(2) after the assessee filed a return in response to a Section 148 notice.

Sections Cited

147, 148, 143(2), 144B, 142(1), 69A, 292BB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Pr. CIT v. Oberoi Hotels (P.) Ltd.
96 Taxmann.com 104 · 2018 · HC
45 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AR

For Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, DR

Hearing: 13.02.2025Pronounced: 11.03.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 30.11.2023 for the AY 2017-18.

At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pressed the issue raised in ground no.6, which is extracted as under:-

“6. For that, the Assessment Order u/s 147 read with section 144B is unlawful having been passed without the issue of Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act;” 03. The facts in brief are that the assessee did not file any return of income for the instant assessment year. The proceeding u/s 147 of the Act were initiated by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act, which were

In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee when the assessee failed to file any written submission/ documents in support of the grounds of appeal.

The ld. AR vehemently argued that the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 24.03.2021, directing the assessee to file the return of income within 30 days, which expired on 23.04.2021. The ld. AR submitted that this was a Covid Period and in view of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 in SMW(c) No. 3 of 2020, the period of limitation for filing the return of

The ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that assessee has not filed any return of income within 30 days from the issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 23.04.2021. The ld. DR further submitted that even the due date of filing the return was not extended by the ld. AO and therefore, any return filed beyond the period of 30 days from the issue of notice is invalid and so righty not considered by the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. DR stated that once the assessee has not filed any return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act then it is not necessary under the Act to issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. The ld. DR therefore prayed that the appeal of the assessee may kindly be dismissed on this ground.