PRAVIN HIRJI THAKKAR,THANE vs. ACIT CIR 3, THANE

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.