Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
ITA No. 563/Ahd/2015 DCIT vs. Ajwa Fun World Reseort Ltd Assessment year: 2008-09 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and Mahavir Prasad JM]
ITA No. 563/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year : 2008-09
DCIT .......…………......Appellant Circle 1(1)(1) Vadodara Vs.
M/s. Ajwa Fun World & Resort Ltd .......................Respondent PO Ajwa Compound, Ajwa-Nimeta Road, At. Ajwa, Vadodra – 391 510 [PAN : AABCA 7951 N]
Appearances by: VK Singh for the appellant NS Porwal for the respondent
Date of concluding the hearing : 16.10.2017 Date of pronouncing the order : 27.10.2017
O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, AM: 1. This appeal, filed by the Assessing Officer, is directed against the order dated 26.12.2014 passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2008-09.
When this appeal was called out for hearing, learned counsel for the assessee pointed out that this is a case in which admittedly notice under Section 143(2) was not issued within time, after filing of income-tax return in response to notice under Section 147, and the issue is thus fully covered, in favour of the assessee, by binding judicial precedents.
Learned Departmental Representative could not point out any infirmity in the stand of the learned counsel. He, however, relies upon the stand of the Assessing Officer.
We find that learned CIT(A), while quashing the impugned order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147, has observed as follows:-
ITA No. 563/Ahd/2015 DCIT vs. Ajwa Fun World Reseort Ltd Assessment year: 2008-09 Page 2 of 2 “3.2 It can be seen from the above that the notice u/s 143(2) r.w.s. 147 was issued by the AO on 08/01/2014 i.e. after the expiry of six months from the end of the Financial Year (i.e. 2012-13) in which the return of income was filed by the appellant in pursuance to notice u/s 148 of the IT Act. Thus, it can be said that the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was not issued by the AO within the time limit as prescribed as per proviso to section 143(2)(ii) of the IT Act. In view of this it is held that the notice u/s 143(2) as issued by the AO to the appellant pursuance to notice u/s 148 of the IT Act is barred by limitation and therefore proceedings u/s 143(3) came to an end and the matter became final. Thus, it is held that the reopening of assessment as made by the AO in the case of appellant for the year under consideration is bad in law. In this regard the support is drawn from the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs C. Palaniappan, 284 ITR 257 and from another decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs. M. Chellappan, 281 ITR 444. Thus, the grounds of appeal from 1 to 1.3 of the appellant are allowed.”
We see no infirmity in the stand so taken by the CIT(A). When admittedly notice under Section 143(2) has not been issued within permissible time limit, even though in respect of return in response to notice under Section 147, there is no occasion for framing of an assessment under Section 143(3). Learned CIT(A) thus rightly quashed the order.
In view of the above discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) and decline to interfere in the matter.
In the result, appeal is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 27th October, 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
Mahavir Prasad Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 27th day of October, 2017 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad