Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal is against the order of CIT(A) NFAC confirming reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act for AY 2014-15. The AO had made additions of Rs. 34,39,806/-. The assessee contended that the notice under Section 148 was issued without valid jurisdiction.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked valid jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148 for reassessment proceedings under Section 147. The Tribunal noted that the proper course of action should have been under Section 153C.
Key Issues
The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated by issuing a notice under Section 148 without valid jurisdiction, and whether Section 153C was the appropriate section to invoke.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 148, 153C, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PUNE
Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD
आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi dated 05.04.2024 framed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2014-15 which is arising out of order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act dated 30.03.2022.
Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. 1. On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT-Appeal, NFAC, Delhi, has erred in confirming and upholding the action of the AO regarding re-opening of the Assessment by issue of Notice u/s 148 which is without valid assumption of Jurisdiction and therefore bad in law.
2. On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT-Appeal, NFAC, Delhi, has erred in confirming and upholding the assessment order, which is passed by the AO, arbitrarily in gross violation of principle of natural justice.
3. On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT-Appeal, NFAC, Delhi, has erred in confirming and upholding the assessment order, which is passed by the AO in gross violation of mandatory CBDT guidelines.
4. On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT-Appeal, NFAC, Delhi, has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 34,39,806/- made by the AO on account of estimating the turnover of the appellant at Rs. 4,55,69,117/- and also estimating the Net Income @8% of estimated Gross Receipts of Rs. 4,55,69,117/-, when the account itself did not pertain to the appellant.
5. The Appellate craves the right to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of the appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal.
3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the legal issues raised in ground No. 1 challenging the validity of notice issued u/s 148 of the Act being issued without justification and the validity of the reassessment proceedings carried out in the assessee’s case for A.Y. 2014-15 submitted that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of this Hon’ble Tribunal rendered in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2013-14 in dated 19.09.2024 (Copy placed on record). Assessee also placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sejal Jewellery & others V/s Union of India writ petition of 2019 dated 18.02.2025.
4. On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) fairly admitting that similar issue stands decided by this Hon’ble Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2013-14, however placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT-7, New Delhi Vs Naveen Kumar Gupta (Delhi) dated 20.11.2024 [168 taxmann.com 574 (Delhi)(20.11.2024)] 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We notice that the assessee is an individual and total income of Rs. 4,24,100/- declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2014-15 dated 13.12.2014. Based on the information about cash deposit, case of the assessee selected for scrutiny followed up by framing of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act making addition of Rs. 34,39,806/- towards unaccounted business income calculated @ 8% of the turn over/cash deposits. We further observe that the assessee challenged the additions before Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed. Assessee has raised a legal ground for this Tribunal challenging the validity of decision of issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. We note that this legal issue has been raised for the first time before this Tribunal and the same deserves to be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. However the assessee has placed the copy of decision rendered by this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2013-14 dealing with the very same issue and this Tribunal considering the similar facts has held that the proper course of action by the Assessing Officer (AO) should have been taken u/s 153C and not under section 147 of the Act. Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) failed to controvert these contentions. So far as the reliance placed by Ld. DR on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Naveen Kumar Gupta (Supra) Ld. Counsel for the assessee has referred to the later judgement of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Seejal Jewellery and others (Supra) which has been rendered in favour of the assessee.
Under these given facts and circumstances, we are inclined to allow the legal issue raised by assessee in ground No. 1 and hold that Ld. AO did not had valid jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act for carrying out reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and proper course is to issue 153C of the Act. Accordingly assessment order in the case of assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 dated 30.03.2022 is quashed. Dealing with the remaining grounds would be merely academic in nature and therefore they are held to be academic in nature. Finding of Ld. CIT(A) is reversed. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on legal issue are allowed as per terms indicated above.
In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated herein above.
Order pronounced on this 25th day of November, 2025.