ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3, VISAKHAPATNAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 478/VIZ/2024Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 December 2025AY 2018-198 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 assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 144B is null and void due to the non-issuance of a valid notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted that while the AO's affidavit claimed notices were sent with attachments, the screenshot of the email provided by the assessee clearly showed no attachment. Furthermore, the Revenue authorities could not obtain archived records from the Technical Department to categorically establish that the notice under section 143(2) was attached to the email sent to the assessee. Given these circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that there was no proper service of notice under section 143(2), rendering the consequent assessment proceedings unsustainable and void ab initio. The legal ground raised by the assessee was allowed. As a result, other grounds raised on merits were left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, ISR Infra Private Limited, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2018-19 declaring a loss of Rs. 152/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and statutory notices under section 142(1) were issued. The assessee did not comply with any notices. A letter dated March 24, 2021, was sent electronically requesting financial details, business activity, payments under section 194C, unsecured loans, expenses, and TDS. The assessee failed to respond. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, determining the total income at Rs. 13,33,62,630/- and raising a tax demand of Rs. 14,43,23,580/-. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who partly allowed the appeal. The assessee is now in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 144B is null and void due to the non-issuance of a notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that while an email was sent regarding the notice under section 143(2), no attachment containing the notice was included. Consequently, the assessee did not receive the notice, could not participate in the assessment proceedings, and the assessment framed under section 144 is invalid and void ab initio. The assessee relied on judicial precedents stating that service of notice is mandatory. Revenue's contention: The Revenue contended that the email indicated the notice was attached and that the assessee was aware of the notice's issuance and could have obtained a copy from the Jurisdictional AO. Therefore, the assessment should not be invalidated on this ground. The Revenue also submitted an affidavit from the AO stating that notices were issued on September 22, 2019, and September 29, 2019, and were delivered to the assessee's e-filing account with email alerts explicitly stating the attachment of the notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 143(2),Section 144B,Section 142(1),Section 194C,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 69C,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry, CA
For Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.AR

आदेश /O R D E R

PER SHRI S. BALAKRISHNAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appealis filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] vide DIN & Order No.

I.T.A.No.478/VIZ/2024 ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068776989(1) dated 18.09.2024 arising out of order passed under section 144 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 27.04.2021.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, assessee being a Private Limited Company filed its return of income for the A.Y.2018-19 declaring total loss of Rs.152/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and various statutory notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. Assessee has not complied with anyof the notices including the show-cause notice. Thereafter, a letter dated 24.03.2021 was issued to the assessee electronically calling for details of copy of financials, nature of business activity, details of payments made under section 194C, details of unsecured loans, details of expenses and TDS deducted etc. The assessee failed to respond to theletter dated 24.03.2021. Thereafter, the Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld.AO"] proceeded to complete the assessment as per the provisions of section 144 of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.13,33,62,630/- and raised tax demand of Rs.14,43,23,580/-.

3. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.

4.

On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by raising seven grounds as under: -

Page. No 2

I.T.A.No.478/VIZ/2024 ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED “1. The assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 144B is null and void as notice under section 143(2) has not been issued. Ground 2. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is not justified in confirming disallowance of Rs.2,98,026/- under section 40(a)(ia).Ground 3. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is not justified in confirming the treatment of Rs.34,14,944/- as unexplained expenditure under section 69C.Ground 4. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is not justified in confirming the treatment of Rs.45,30,000/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68. Ground 5. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is not justified in confirming the treatment of Rs.1,00,00,000/- as unexplained expenditure under section 69C on the basis of entry in form 26AS when the transaction is relevant to the assessment year 2017-18Ground 6. All the above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another. Ground 7. The appellant craves leave to add to; alter; amend; modify or delete all or any of the above grounds of appeal. Ground 5. Additionally, assessee also filed additional grounds as follows:-

“1. The assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 144B is null and void as notice under section 143(2) has not been issued.

2. The Id. AO erred in issuing notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 22.09.2019without complying with the CBDT Instruction F.No.225/157/2017/TA-II dated 23.06.2017 and so the notice issued u/s 143(2) is not valid as per law and hence the entire assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act are without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

3.

The additions to the returned income/loss made by the Assessment National Faceless Assessment Centre is beyond the scope of the issues for which the case of the assessee is selected for scrutiny.”

6.

Since the additional grounds are legal in nature, we admit the same and proceed to adjudicate the additional ground at first.

Page. No 3

I.T.A.No.478/VIZ/2024 ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED 7. On this issue, Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] submitted that the assessee was sent an E-Mail regarding the notice under section 143(2) of the Act, however, no attachment was made to the E-Mail appending the notice under section 143(2) of the Act. He referred to Page No. 5 of the paper book-I wherein the E-Mail was sent by the Income Tax Officer but no attachment was appended to the E-Mail. Ld.AR submitted that since no notice was received, assessee could not participate in the assessment proceedings and therefore the assessment was framed under section 144 of the Act. He prayed that since no notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued and served on the assessee the scrutiny assessment proceedings initiated by the Ld. AO is not valid in law and void abinitio.

8.

Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] submitted that E-Mail indicated the notice has been attached and appended to the E-Mail. She also reiterated that assessee is aware of the issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act and he could have approached to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to obtain the copy of the same. She therefore pleaded that the assessment cannot be invalidated on the ground that no notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee.

9.

Countering the arguments of the Ld. DR, Ld.AR submitted that the Revenue is duty bound to ensure the issuance and service of notice to the assessee before proceeding with the scrutiny assessment proceedings. Ld.AR

Page. No 4

I.T.A.No.478/VIZ/2024 ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED submitted that various judicial precedents have held that service of notice to the assessee is mandatory.

10.

We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the Ld. AO has sent an E-Mail mentioning the body of the E-Mail that notice under section 143(2) of the Act is attached, however, screenshot of the E-Mail furnished by the assessee in the Page No. 5 of the paper book-1 clearly indicates that no attachment is appended to the E-Mail. The bench directed the Ld. DR to produce an affidavit from the Ld.AO regarding the serving of the notice under section 143(2) of the Act. Ld. DR submitted that the affidavit received from DCIT-Circle -3(1), Visakhapatnam as follows: - “1. That I am the Assessing Officer in the case of M/s ISRINFRA PVT. LTD (PAN:AACCI4323D) for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and I am duly authorized and competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That in compliance with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, during the proceedings held on 07/07/2025 in I hereby submit the following clarifications: (i) Proof of Service of Notices: a. Notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was issued to the assessee on 22/09/2019 vide DIN: ITBA/AST/S/143(2)/2019- 20/1018148174(1). b. Another notice under section 143(2) was subsequently issued on 29/09/2019 videDIN: ITBA/AST/S/143(2)/2019-20/1018465221(1). c. As verified from the ITBA system, both notices were successfully delivered to the assessee's registered e-filing account. Further, system-

Page. No 5

I.T.A.No.478/VIZ/2024 ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED generated alerts were sent to the assessee's registered email address as follows: • For the notice dated 22/09/2019, email alert was sent on 23/09/2019 at 10:59:29 PM. • For the notice dated 29/09/2019, email alert was sent on 29/09/2019at04:42:18 PM. d. Importantly, the alert emails sent to the assessee on the above- mentioned dates explicitly stated, "Please find attached the notice u/s. 143(2)," thereby confirming that the notices were enclosed as attachments to the respective emails. This substantiates that the notices were duly communicated and made available to theassessee through both the e-filing portal and the registered email. Relevant ITBA system screenshots capturing the email delivery timestamps and content of the alert messages are enclosed herewith for reference as Annexure 1. (ii) Clarification on Non-availability of Notices on the Assessee's e- Filing Portal: To the best of my knowledge and as per verification from the records, both notices were uploaded and made available through the assessee's e-filing account at the time of issuance. The reason why the said notices are presently not appearing on the portal may be due to subsequent archival, portal migration, or technical issues at the backend of the e-filing system. This aspect is beyond the control of the Assessing Officer and pertains to the system architecture managed by the Directorate ofSystems, CBDT. (iii) Explanation on Issuance of Multiple Notices: The first notice under section 143(2) was issued on 22/09/2019 within the statutory time limit. However, due to inadvertence and oversight during initial system workflow configuration or due to procedural caution, a second notice under the same section was issued on 29/09/2019. Both notices pertain to the same assessment year and are based on the same return of income. No prejudice was caused to the assessee due to the issuance of two notices. The assessment was carried forward based on the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the validly issued notice within the time prescribed under law.”

Page. No 6

I.T.A.No.478/VIZ/2024 ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED 11. On perusal of the affidavit, we notice that Ld. AO attached the screenshot of the same E-Mail as provided by the assessee stating that the notice is attached. However, no such attachment is appended to the E-Mail. Further the bench also directed the Ld. DR to obtain records from the Technical Department regarding the service of the notice under section 143(2) of the Act from archived records. However, the Revenue Authorities could not obtain the same and categorically establish that the notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been attached to the E-Mail sent to the assessee. Given these circumstances, we are of the opinion that there isnoproper service of notice under section 143(2) of the Act and hence consequent assessment proceedings could not be sustained and void-ab-initio. Thus, we allow the legal ground raised by the assessee.

12.

Since the legal ground is adjudicated in favour of the assessee, other grounds raised on merits are left open.

13.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 03rd December, 2025.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →