Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Thane (in short referred to as „CIT(A)‟) dt. 8.8.2013 passed against the assessment order of the Assessing Officer (in short referred to as „AO‟) dt. 29.12.2011 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short referred to as „the Act‟) for the A.Y 2008-09 on the following grounds:
“1. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961, ignoring the fact that the notice u/s 148 issued on 24.12.2010 was invalid in law and therefore the order of assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 was also bad-in-law and required to be quashed.
2. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961, inspite of the undisputed fact that notice u/s 143(2) was not issued by the ld. A.O prior to completion of assessment and therefore the assessment framed was null and void and required to be quashed on that count.”
During the course of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is noted that on earlier occasions also, notices were issued to the assessee but no appearance has been made. Under these circumstances, we are proceeding to dispose the appeal on merits after hearing the learned Departmental Representative (in short „the DR‟).
It is noted that the solitary issue raised by the assessee in his appeal is for challenging the upholding of validity of the assessment framed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act solely on the ground that notice u/s 143(2) was not issued by the AO prior to completion of the assessment. It is noted from the perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) that this issue was raised by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) also, wherein this ground was dismissed on the ground that notice u/s. 143(2) was not required to be issued because there was no variation in the return made by the AO in the impugned assessment order. The assessment has been done by accepting the returned income of the assessee. Under these circumstances, there was no legal compulsion upon the AO to issue notice u/s. 143(2).
In our considered opinion, the findings and reasoning given by the ld. CIT(A) are in accordance with law and facts of this case. We do not find anything wrong therein. In the absence of anything wrong having been pointed out in the order of the ld. CIT(A), we have no other option but to uphold the same. In view of this fact, both grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.
As a result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 2nd March, 2016.