YASHBIR SINGH,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD-5, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5174/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 October 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 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 was invalid because the AO who framed the assessment did not issue the mandatory section 143(2) notice. The notice was issued by a different officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2017-18. The assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer (AO) Ward-5, Panipat, but the mandatory section 143(2) notice was issued by ITO Ward-2, Fatehbad.

What were the issues?

Validity of assessment order when section 143(2) notice was not issued by the assessing officer who framed the assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. 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

Hearing: 24.09.2025Pronounced: 13.10.2025

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the Addl/JCIT(A), Agra’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/10790135299(1) dated 31.07.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2 5174/Del/2025 Yashbir Singh

3.

It emerges during course of hearing that the first and foremost legal issue which arises for the tribunal’s apt adjudication that is validity of impugned assessment framed by the learned Assessing Officer dated 25.12.2019 itself. This is for the precise reason that the Assessing Officer framing assessment herein is the learned Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Panipat whereas the Income Tax officer, Ward-2, Fatehbad had issued mandatory section 143(2) notice dated 13.08.2018. Meaning thereby that it is clear cut case if the learned Assessing Officer having not issued any section 143(2) notice forming a mandatory condition in ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). I accordingly reject Revenue’s vehement contentions supporting the impugned assessment in very terms. The assessee succeeds in his instant first and foremost legal ground. All the other pleading between the parties on merits stand rendered academic.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 13/10/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →