Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose against an order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144. The primary issue raised was the validity of the assessment due to the absence of a section 143(2) notice after the assessee filed its return.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Revenue could not dispute the lack of a mandatory section 143(2) notice, referencing the precedent set in ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). Consequently, the impugned assessment was quashed.
Key Issues
The validity of the assessment proceedings for non-issuance of a mandatory section 143(2) notice.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 143(2)
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, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082375330(1) dated 07.11.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
Coming to the assessee’s first and foremost legal ground, it emerges that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessment dated 14.03.2023 itself for want of issuance of section 143(2) notice in furtherance to his return admittedly filed on 28.03.2022.
Shridhar Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. 4. That being the case, the Revenue could hardly dispute that even the learned assessing authority has tabulated a list of all the opportunities given to the assessee wherein there is no such mention a notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act forming a mandatory condition as per ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). I thus quash the impugned assessment for the precise reason. Ordered accordingly.
All other remaining issue between the parties stand rendered academic.