SCAN INDURSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SUNDARGARH vs. PR. CIT, SAMBALPUR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order passed by the Pr. CIT under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary issue was the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessment order was initiated based on a notice under section 148. The screenshot of the e-proceeding clearly shows that the notice under section 148 was issued on 01.04.2021, which is bad in law as it was beyond the prescribed date. Consequently, the assessment order and the revisionary proceedings under section 263 are also bad in law.
Key Issues
Whether the notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was within the prescribed time limit and if not, whether the consequential assessment order and revisionary proceedings are valid.
Sections Cited
263, 147, 144B, 148, 149(1)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.102/CTK/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) Scan Industries Private Limited, Vs Pr.CIT, Sambalpur Q1, Civil Township, Rourkela PAN No. :AEOPS 8527 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S. K. Poddar, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 07/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld PR. CIT, Sambalpur u/s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2014-15 in DIN & Order No.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2023- 24/1060101431(1). 2. It was submitted by ld AR that before the ld Pr. CIT, Sambalpur, in response to show cause notice u/s.263 of the Act, the assessee had categorically submitted that the original assessment order, which was passed u/s.147/144B of the Act dated 30.3.2022 itself was bad in law, insofar as the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act was issued only on 1.4.2021 and not on 31.3.2021, which was the last date for issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act. Ld AR drew our attention to page 20 of written
2 ITA No.102/CTK/2024 submission, which is the screenshots of the e-assessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act, which reads as follows: -
3 ITA No.102/CTK/2024 3. It was submission that the PR. CIT in his order u/s 263 of the Act at the end of para 9 at page 14 of the order has mentioned that notice u/s 148 was issued on 31.03.2021 which was well within the time limit prescribed 149(1)(b) of the Act. It was the submission that this finding of Ld Pr.CIT was wrong, insofar as the notice u/s.148 of the Act has been issued only on 01.04.2021 which is evidenced by the assessment proceedings order sheet notings which has been extracted above. It was submitted that consequently as the assessment proceedings is itself bad in law, the consequential proceedings u/s 263 are liable to set aside. 4. In reply ld CIT DR vehemently supported the order of the Pr. CIT. It was the submission that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued and the assessment order has been accepted by the asssessee and should not be tinkered with. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. The primary requirement for 263 revisionary proceeding is the existence of a valid assessment order. Admittedly, the assessment order, which is the subject matter of the revisionary proceedings u/s 263 is the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144B of the Act on 30.03.2022. This assessment order has been initiated on account of notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. The said notice u/s 148 in the assessment order in para 3 also specifically mentioned to have been issued on 31.03.2021. However, the screenshot of the notice of e-proceeding which has been extracted above clearly shows that the notice u/s 148 has been issued on 1.04.2021. Admittedly, this notice issued itself would be bad in law and consequential
4 ITA No.102/CTK/2024 assessment order would be bad in law. Obviously, once the assessment order itself is bad in law, the revisionary proceedings u/s 263 passed by the Pr. CIT on such invalid assessment order would also be bad in law. In these circumstances, the order passed u/s 263 by the Pr. CIT in the case of the assesee for the impugned assessment order is set aside as being bad in law. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 07/04/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (राजेश कुमार) (जाजज माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ददनाांक Dated 07/04/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 1. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack
