Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessment was completed under Section 144, adding Rs. 33,55,380 as unexplained deposits under Section 69A. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order. The assessee appealed, contending that the notice under Section 148, which initiated the reassessment proceedings, was not properly served on the correct address.
Held
The tribunal found that the notice under Section 148 was returned undelivered and no further efforts were made for proper service. Citing that valid service of notice under Section 148 is a jurisdictional prerequisite, the tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law and quashed the assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 are valid if the notice under Section 148 was not properly served on the assessee at their correct address.
Sections Cited
144, 69A, 148, 142(1), 147, 282, 282(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “एस.एम.सी” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, “SMC” CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी िव"म "सह यादव, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Anil Kumar Mittal बनाम The ITO H.No. 143, DLF Valley Ward6(1), Ludhiana Panchkula, Haryana-134109 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ALAPM0481A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21/08/2025 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/08/2025 आदेश/Order
PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM
1. This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 26/09/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13.
Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed under section 144 dt. 03/12/2019 wherein the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs. 33,55,380/- as unexplained deposit in the bank account maintained by the assessee invoking the provisions of Section 69A of the Act. Against the order of the AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since confirmed the order of the Ld. AO. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the notice under section 148 dt. 30/03/2019 has not been served on the assessee on his address and some other address has been mentioned in the notice which doesn’t belong to the assessee. It was submitted that on inspection of the assessment records, it has been noted that the notice has been returned undelivered which clearly demonstrate that no notice has been served on the assessee. It was submitted that non service of notice under section 148 is a jurisdictional defect and therefore the reassessment proceedings so initiated by the AO deserves to be set aside.
In this regard, reference was drawn to the written submissions filed on behalf of the assessee which read as under:
“ISSUE NO.1: "NON-SERVICE OF NOTICES ISSUED U/S 148 & 142(1) OF THE ACT" At the outset, it is submitted that the issue and service of notice u/s 148 of the Act is jurisdictional requirement that must be mandatorily complied with and not merely a procedural requirement. Further, the AO cannot complete the reassessment without service of the notices so issued upon the assessee in accordance with section 282 of the Act. However, in the case of assessee, no notices in relation to assessment proceedings were served upon the assessee on his correct address rather, all such service of notices was on the incorrect address. b. Further, for your goodself reference, the details and sequence of notices issued by the Ld. AO in relation to assessment proceedings are as under:
NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE SL. ADDRESS FOR SERVICE OF COMMENT ON THE ENVELOPE u/s NOTICE RETURNED BY THE POSTAL No. AUTHORITY 1. 148 30.03.2019 Industrial Area-A, Ludhiana Addressee Left 2. 142(1) 09.09.2019 Industrial Area-A, Ludhiana Addressee Left 3. 142(1) 22.10.2019 Shere Punjab Colony address Addressee Left 4. 142(1) 07.11.2019 Industrial Area-A, Ludhiana Addressee Left 5. 142(1) 20.11.2019 Shere Punjab Colony address Addressee Left It can be seen from the above table that the notices (enclosed in Paper Book at Page No. 3 and 8-15) as issued by the Ld. AO during the assessment proceeding were not ever served upon the assessee, thereby, the notices remained non-complied. The Ld. AO without knowing the reasons for non-compliances of the notices, in a presumed state of mind, concluded the assessment u / s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act. c. Further, the fact which needs your goodself's kind attention is that for the AY 2011-12, the assessee has filed his return of income wherein, the address has been mentioned as 41, Shere Punjab Colony, Ludhiana, copy of the ITR for AY 2011-12 is placed in the paper book at page no. 41-42. Further, the same address has been mentioned in the ITR filed for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 and subsequently, he shifted to Asha Puri, Ludhiana and then from 01.02.2019, he shifted to Panchkula Along with his family which is evident from the rent deed enclosed at Pages 16-18 of the Paper Book. d. From the above facts, it can be concluded that in the case of the assessee no notice of assessment has been served and it is hereby submitted that service of notice u / s 148 of the Act is the basic assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO for initiation of assessment and wherein, such notice u / s 148 of the Act has not been served therefore, the reassessment concluded by the Ld. AO is "ouster of jurisdiction" i.e. the Ld. AO does not have any jurisdiction to assess the case of the assessee and consequently, the assessment order passed in such circumstances is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. Reliance in this regard is placed on following judgments:
Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-I Vs Chetan Gupta as reported in [2015] 62 taxmann.com 249 (Delhi), (enclosed at Page 59-69 of the Judgment set)
It has been reported as under "On the facts of the present case, the Tribunal was right in its conclusion that since no proper service of notice had been affected under section 148 (1) on the assessee, the reassessment proceedings were liable to be quashed. [Para 47]"
• Smt. Charanjit Kaur in IT A No.193/CHD/2020, dated 15.03.2021 wherein, it has been held as under: "10. We have heard the rival content ions of the parties and carefully perused the material on record including the case law relied upon by the Ld. Counsel. The evidence on record prima facie shows that notice ul s 148 of the Act was not served upon the assessee. The Revenue is not in a position to rebut the contention of the assessee. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court i n the case of CIT vs . Chetan Gupta (supra) has held that i n order to initiate reassessment proceedings, notice u / s 148 of the Act has to be served mandatorily served upon assessee i n accordance w i t h sect ion 282(1) of the Act read w i t h Order V, Rule 12 and Order III Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code…………… ...............
Hence, in our considered view, the Ld. CIT-(A) has sustained the addition in question ignoring that the impugned order suffers from the legal infirmities discussed in the forgoing paras. In the light of the fact s of the case and the cases relied upon by the Ld. Counsel, we are of the opinion that the impugned order is not sustainable i n law as the Id. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ignoring the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and Madhya Pradesh and also the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal discussed above. We accordingly allow the legal grounds raised
by the assessee and set as ide the impugned order passed by the. Ld. CIT(A). '
18. Since we have allowed the appeal of the assessee, we do not consider i t necessary to adjudicate the other grounds of appeal raised on merit. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed."
Income-tax Officer, Ward 2 (3), Chandigarh vs. Om Parkash Kukreja [2016] 70 taxmann.com 147 (Chandigarh - Trib). (enclosed at Page 81-87 of the Judgment set) Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for (Service of notice) - Assessment year 2006-07 - Whether service of notice under section 148 Is condition precedent to validity of any re-assessment made under section 148 - Held, yes -Whether where assessee was not residing at address, as given In notice under section 148, there was no question of any valid service through affixture of said notice at that address and reassessment proceedings Initiated by Assessing Officer In pursuance of such notice would be Invalid and bad In law - Held, yes [Para 13] [In favour of assessee] Judgment of the Hon'ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT in the case of Sh. Balbir Singh and Sh. Navpreet Singh in IT A NO. 567-568/CHD/2016 wherein, it has been held as under:
"17. A perusal of the assessment order further reveals that when the service could not be effected at the village address of the assessee, the Assessing officer thereafter served the notice u / s 142(1) of the Act at his office address which means that the Assessing officer had come to know the office address of the assessee at which service can be effected but admittedly no notice u / s 148 of the Act was served on the assessee at his office address also. Under the circumstances, i t is clear that there was no valid service of notice u / s 148 of the Act on the assessee.
The issue, therefore, is squarely covered by the recent decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court i n the case of 'Sumit Balkrishna Gupta Vs. ACIT' (supra) in Writ petition No. 3569 of 2018 vide order dated 15.2.2019, wherein, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that the issue of a notice under Section 148 of the Act is a foundation for reopening of assessment and condition precedent for framing of the assessment u / s 147 of the Income Tax Act. Since there was no valid service of the notice u / s 148 of the Act, therefore, the consequent assessment proceedings framed u / s 147 of the Act are not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same are accordingly quashed. The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed.
In the result, both the captioned appeals are hereby allowed." Hence, in line with the above judgments, it is hereby requested before the Hon'ble Bench that when in the case of the assessee, the notice u / s 148 of the Act has not been served therefore, the assessment concluded by the Ld. AO without such service of notice suffers from legal defect and hence, the assessment order deserves to be quashed and the additions made by the Ld. AO deserves to be deleted.”
The Ld. DR is heard who has relied on the order of the lower authorities.