M/S.SAHANI AUTO PARTS CO.,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(3)(2), MUMBAI

The captioned appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [AY] 2009-10 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-52 [CIT(A)], Mumbai, Appeal No.CIT(A)-52/IT-93/19(3)(2)/17- 18 dated 12/12/2017. The assessment for impugned AY was framed by Ld. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(2), Mumbai [AO] u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act,1961 on 19/03/2015 wherein the assessee has been saddled with addition on account of alleged bogus ITA.No.1502/Mum/2018 Sahani Auto Parts Company Assessment Year- 2009-10 purchases for Rs.12,40,727/-. The only grounds pressed before us are Ground Numbers- 2 & 3, which reads as under:- 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that proceedings initiated under section 147, read with section 148 are bad as the condition and procedure prescribed under statute have not been complied with. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment order passed is otherwise bad in law in absence of valid service of notice U/s 148 of the IT Act 1961.

The Ld. Authorized Representative, Shri P.Daniel, drawing our attention to the documents placed before us, pleaded that notice u/s 148 was never issued to the assessee and therefore, the Ld. AO had no valid jurisdiction under law to reframe the assessment. Our attention is drawn to the fact that Ld. first appellate authority has not dealt with this vital aspect of jurisdiction and therefore, the same may be adjudicated. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [DR], Ms. N.Hemalatha submitted that the assessee had participated in the reassessment proceedings. 3. Upon careful consideration, we find that issuance of statutory notice u/s 148 is sine qua non to assume valid reassessment jurisdiction by Ld. AO. The onus is on revenue to demonstrate that a valid notice was issued to the assessee. Upon perusal of appellate order, we find that this aspect of the matter has not been adjudicated by Ld. CIT(A) despite being pleaded by the assessee. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the issue, the matter stand remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication of the jurisdictional issue as raised by the assessee.