Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against an assessment order framed by the AO following a remand, arguing that the assessment was invalid as the AO mistakenly mentioned a different Assessment Year (AY 2012-13 instead of AY 2008-09) and Financial Year in all notices and the assessment order. Although a corrigendum was later issued to correct the AY/FY, the assessee contended that this fundamental error rendered the entire proceeding void ab-initio.
Held
The Tribunal held that the consistent error in mentioning the Assessment Year and Financial Year in the notices and the assessment order demonstrated a serious non-application of mind by the AO, constituting a fatal and incurable defect. This defect was not curable under Section 292B of the Act, even if the assessee had participated in CIT(A) proceedings without raising this specific issue. Consequently, the assessment framed by the AO was quashed.
Key Issues
Whether an assessment order and associated notices are invalid if the Assessment Year and Financial Year are incorrectly stated, and if such a defect is curable under Section 292B of the Income Tax Act.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144, 254, 274, 271, 271(1)(c), 292B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
(Assessment Year:2008-09) ACIT, Cir-1, Dakshin Damodar Rice Mill Aaykar Bhavan, Court Private Limited. Bankura More Muchkhada, Compound, Burdwan-713101, Vs. Burdwan-713103, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AABCD1784A Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Shri Pranbesh Sarkar, Ars Revenue by : Shri Sailen Samadder, DR Date of hearing: 08.01.2025 Date of pronouncement : 21.01.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
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 26.02.2024 for the AY 2008-09.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee challenged the validity of the assessment order framed by the ld. AO u/s 14(3)/144/254 of the Act vide order dated 18.03.2015.
The facts in brief are that this being the second round before the Tribunal. In the first found vide order dated 23.05.2013, the co- ordinate Bench has restored the issue to the file of the ld. AO in assessee’s cross appeals in filed and the Revenue’s appeals in and directed the AO to re-adjudicate the same as the assessee has given reasonable explanation with regard to non-representation of his case before the
The ld. Authorized Representative vehemently submitted before us when in all the notices, assessment order, penalty notice, demand notice, the assessment year and the financial year has wrongly been mentioned as 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively instead of 2007-08 and 2008-09, then the assessee cannot be attributed any fault in not co-operating and not complying notices before the ld. AO as there was no pending proceeding for that assessment year. The ld. Authorized Representative stated that when the notices were issued mentioning the A.Y. 2012-13 and F.Y. 2011-12 and the same mistake was repeated in all the subsequent notices, the assessment order, demand notice, penalty notice, then it is apparent that the assessment framed by the ld. AO is invalid and have to be quashed. The ld. Authorized Representative prayed before the Bench this was a case of gross negligence and non application of mind on the part of the ld. AO and therefore, the notices issued and assessment framed were invalid and void ab-initio and may kindly be quashed.
The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that this was merely a mistake on the part of the AO while issuing the notices in the set aside proceedings to the assessee and also the same mistake occurred in
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that this is the second round of litigation before the Tribunal. In the first round vide order dated 23.05.2013, passed in the cross appeal filed before the Tribunal by the Revenue as well as by the assessee in 432/KOL/2012 respectively, and the co-ordinate Bench restored the issue to the file of the ld. AO for denovo adjudication of the matter. However, in the set aside proceedings, the ld. AO issued notice for F.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13. Similarly, the assessment was framed by mentioning wrong financial year as 2011-12 and A.Y. 2012-13. Same mistake occurred in notice initiating penalty proceeding u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act and the demand notice. Thereafter, the ld. AO brought a corrigendum wherein it has been stated that in the assessment under order and all the notices the assessment year should be read as 2008-09 instead of 2012-13 and previous year should be read as 2007-08 instead of 2011-12. For the sake of ready reference, the corrigendum is extracted below:-
“In the assessment order passed under Section 144/254/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dtd. 18.03.2015 in the case of M/s Dakshin Damodar Rice Mill (PP Ltd., Bankura More, P.O. Machkhanda, Burdwan-713103 [PAN AABCD1784A], the assessment year was inadvertently written as ‘2012-13’ instead of assessment year ‘2008-09’ and the previous year was inadvertently written as ‘2011-12’ instead of previous year ‘2007-08’. In the notice of demand and in the notice under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) both dated 18.03.2015 the assessment year was inadvertently written as ‘2012-13’ instead of assessment year ‘2008’09. In all the above mentioned order and notices the assessment year should be read as ‘2008-09’ instead of assessment year ‘2012-13’ and the previous year should be read as ‘2007-08’ instead of
In the result, the appeal of the assesseeis allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21.01.2025.