“service of notice”

ReassessmentSection 148Section 1483,297 judgments

The decision most relied on for service of notice is Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai (84 Taxmann.com 51), cited in 263 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on service of notice

Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai

84 Taxmann.com 51 · 2017 · ITAT

263

citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be deleted merely due to technical defects in the penalty notice, such as not ticking the specific default, if the assessee understood the charges.

CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal

417 ITR 325 · 2019 · Supreme Court

225

citing judgments

Issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) is a mandatory requirement for completing an assessment when a return is filed, including reassessment under Section 147/143(3). The complete absence of this notice renders the assessment invalid and is not curable by Section 292BB.

1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co.

53 ITR 231 · 1964 · Supreme Court

158

citing judgments

Income-tax assessment proceedings are administrative in nature, not civil disputes or judicial proceedings between contesting parties. Income-tax authorities act as administrative bodies to estimate income and assess tax, and the proper service of notice within the limitation period is foundational for reassessment jurisdiction.

Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship v. CIT (Exemptions)

463 ITR 560 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Service of notice through the ITBA portal is not a valid method of service under section 282(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and Rule 127(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Consequently, matters where notice was deemed invalidly served via ITBA portal are remanded to the Assessing Officer for a de novo disposal to uphold principles of natural justice.

Narayana Chetty v. ITO

35 ITR 388 · 1959 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A valid and properly served notice under section 148 (or old section 34) is a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite for initiating reassessment proceedings; its absence or invalidity renders the entire proceedings illegal and void ab initio. The validity of service hinges on adherence to prescribed modes, not merely the recipient's acknowledgment.

Mavis Satcom Ltd. v. Deputy CIT

337 ITR 389 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

The present case is cited as authority for the proposition that notices issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are valid even if they do not refer to the reasons recorded for initiating reassessment proceedings, provided the reasons are communicated to the assessee. Furthermore, the issue of jurisdiction under Section 124(3) and the validity of notice under Section 143(2) are also key areas addressed.

CIT v. Gitsons Engineering Co.

370 ITR 87 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

The issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory, and its non-service or invalidity is not a curable procedural irregularity, rendering subsequent assessment proceedings void. Objections regarding non-service of notice, being a jurisdictional issue, can be raised for the first time before the Tribunal.

Banarsi Debi v. ITO

53 ITR 100 · 1964 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

For income-tax notices, particularly under Section 34(1) of the 1922 Act (corresponding to Sections 147/148 of the 1961 Act), there is no real distinction between the 'issue' and 'service' of a notice. The word 'issued' must be given a wider meaning, effectively encompassing 'served'.

Judgments citing service of notice

M/S Devbhumi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1393/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT, D/R

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

Rs.4,540/- declared in the e-return for Assessment Year 2012-13. Case selected for scrutiny through CASS followed by issuance and service of notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act for carrying out assessment proceedings. The ld. Assessing Officer observed that during the year assessee

Chetan Balubhai Sanena, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 32(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3849/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh, Chetan Balubhai Sanena Vs. Income Tax Officer – 32(1)(2) B-405, Rainbow Apartments Bandra Kurla Complex C.S. Road, Dahisar (E) Mumbai 400051 Mumbai 400068 Pan/Gir No. :Acipp3106F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 148

filed copy of the letter dated 20.02.2024 filed before the AO under the RIT Act to provide him information about the date of service of notice u/s. 148 of the Act and copy of other assessment records. The ld. counsel for the assessee also filed copy of the letter dated ... dispatch of assessment order, etc. The assessee has also filed application under RTI Act before the AO for providing information pertaining to service of notices u/s. 148, date of service and issue of assessment order and copy of assessment records for AY 2009-10. 8. Further, during the course

Hardsoft Exim Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 20/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

Counsel for the assessee by saying that the assessee himself permitted the proceeding to go an ex-parte as after even service of notice he did not appear. 5. We have perused the record and find that before the AO as well as ld. CIT(A) the assessee

Krishan Kumar Tarachand, Pune vs. ITO (It) Ward -2, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant assessee is allowed

ITA 513/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.513/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Krishan Kumar Tarachand, Vs. Ito (It), Ward-2, Pune. Flat No.4, Anupam Apartments, Nda Pashan Road, Bavdhan Khurd, Pune- 411021 Pan : Abupd4503C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date Of Hearing : 29.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 09.07.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. (A) The Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Erred In Law & In Facts In Dismissing The Appeal Filed Against Penalty Order U/S. 271(1)(C) Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 25.06.2018 Merely On The Premise That The Appeal Was Filed Belatedly & Without Providing Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard. (B) The Ld. Nfac Erred In Law In Dismissing The Appeal Filed Against Penalty Order U/S. 271(1)(C) Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 25.06.2018 Levying A Penalty Of Rs.6,09,760/- Without

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

appeal before this Tribunal. 7. When the present appeal was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on 4 the basis of the material available on record & after hearing

Rupmata Zilla Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Osmanabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Latur

ITA 399/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 399/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rupmata Zilla Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Ltd. Samarth Nagar, Dharashiv-413501 Pan: Aaaar9677H . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sandbhor [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Sourabh Nayak [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Rupmata Zilla Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Ltd. ITA No. 399/PUN/2024 AY: 2015-16 of the assessee was subjected to scrutiny by service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, through as many six notices u/s 142(1) of the Act the appellant was called

ITO-13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 2739/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleito-13(2)(1) V. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 701, Central Plaza 147, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Daftari Road, Malad (East) M. K. Marg, Mumbai Mumbai, Maharashtra -400097 Maharashtra-400020 Pan: Aalcs9354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Jaiprakash Bairaga & Rupa Nanda Department Represented By : Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

quashing of the assessment order framed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) for want of service of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. Page No. 2 Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 4. Having heard the rival submissions, we have carefully perused ... Sales Tax and others Vs. Subhash & Co. (2003) 3 SCC 454 observed as under: Page No. 11 Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 12. Whether service of notice is valid or not is essentially a question of fact. In the instant case, learned Single Judge found that certain procedures were not followed

Hosiyar Singh, Rewari vs. ITO, Ward-1, Rewari

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 656/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2012-13

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 282

order passed by Ld AO u/s 147/144 without appreciating that assumption of jurisdiction u/s 148 was by Ld AO without proper and valid service of notices U/s. 148 and 142(1) of I.T. Act during assessment proceedings U/s. 144 by not following provisions of Laws for service under Code

Rama Mohan Soma, Anantapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Hindupur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accounant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rama Mohan Soma, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, H.No.12-274-3, Bypass Ward – 1, Road, Kadiri, Anantapur, Hindupur. Andhra Pradesh – 515591. Pan : Aocps8172D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 02.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.05.2024 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2012-13 Arises From Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dt.27.12.2023 Invoking Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”). 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under :

For Appellant: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 254Section 69B

Tribunal had issued directions to the Revenue to submit the report as to the issuance and service of notice u/s 143(2) on the assessee. 8.2. The ld. DR for the Revenue had obtained report from the Assessing Officer and in the said report it was mentioned as under ... invalid. (vi) B.M.Land Developers & Builders v. ITO ward, 11(4), (hAT Hyderabad Bench SMC) ITA No. 1146/HYD/2017. Since the requirement of 'service' of notice u/s. 143(2) and not its 'issue', is a jurisdictional condition, which is unfortunately lacking in the instant case, the sequitur is that the AO lacked

DCIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Vsb Investment Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad

In the result, the cross objection of the Assessee is allowed whereas the Revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 467/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Amit Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Assessing Officer due to incomplete particulars of address and therefore such act of the Assessing Officer cannot be regarded as valid service of notice for assumption of jurisdiction. The ld. counsel thus submits that owing to non service of notice under Section 148 within the limitation period prescribed under Section ... submitted that purported incompleteness alleged in the address is trivial in nature and such partial address mentioned in the envelope for service of notice is equally capable of service, some small incompleteness notwithstanding. The missing part i.e ‘3rd Floor’ in the address is insignificant. Non-mention of floor number would

Smt. Mankinder Kaur, Chandigarh vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 540/CHANDI/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Us Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Delay Of One Day Is Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 253

when the matter was before CIT(A), Chandigarh. On 03.09.2021, she suo moto filed adjournment letter mentioning non service of notice and that she was seeking some information from AO. Thereafter the appellant has not responded. It is clear that sufficient no. of opportunities have been given to the appellant

Vinodchandra Kantilal Patel, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1009/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 50C

note that though the CIT(A) has discussed on merit as well as in the order challenged before us but relating to the service of notices as well as hearing before the CIT(A) of the assessee was not properly done. Therefore, in the interest of justice it will

ITO-19(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Irfan Mohamed Yusuf, Mumbai

ITA 3994/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 for A.Y.2012-13. 2. None appeared on behalf of the respondent-assessee despite of service of notice through RPAD and mail, accordingly, the appeal is being decided exparte after hearing the ld. DR. 2 Irfan Mohamed Yusuf 3. In the grounds

ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 645/KOL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata………..…….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…..........…..........................…..…..... Respondent 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] C.O. 4/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…………….....................…..…..... Cross-Objector 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] Vs Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata …………….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 263

Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gitsons Engineering Co. 370 ITR 87 (Mad) clearly holds that the objection in relation to non service of notice could be raised for the first time before the Tribunal as the same was legal, which went to the root of the matter., I.T.A ... Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gitsons Engineering Co. 370 ITR 87 (Mad) clearly holds that the objection in relation to non service of notice could be raised for the first time before the Tribunal as the some was legal, which went to the root of the matter

Harshal Suresh Karvir, Palghar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4478/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy (Jm) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Am)

Section 144Section 147

submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law. The assessee shall furnish his current functional e-mail ID to the Assessing Officer for service of notice. The assessee shall positively respond to the notice served by the Assessing Officer. In case, the assessee fails to respond to the notice served

Ceat Limited (Tyredivision) Empoyees Co Op Credit Soceity Limited, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 633/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.633/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. When the appeal was called on, none appeared on behalf of the appellant despite due service of notice of hearing. After hearing the ld. DR and perusing the material on record, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte

Prashant Vinayak Adhav, Rajendra Nagar Pune vs. Ward 12 (1) Pune, Bodhi Towers Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 605/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.605/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 154Section 44ASection 89Section 90Section 90ASection 91

dealing with the merits of the addition. When the appeal was called on, none appeared on behalf of 5. the appellant despite due service of notice of hearing. After hearing the ld. DR and perusing the material on record, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte

Adivasi Unnati Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Palghar vs. CIT Circle Palghar, Palghar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4384/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy (Jm) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Am)

Section 144Section 68Section 69A

process of law. The assessee has neither filed return of income for the impugned assessment year nor participated in assessment proceedings despite service of notice. Except for furnishing basic details in tapal, no further explanation/documents were been furnished by the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee after filing appeal before

Subhash Sharma., Belurmath vs. ACIT, Cir-47, Kolkata.

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1100/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.1099 & 1100/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Subhash Sharma Acit, Circle-47, Kolkata 322, Flat-3E, Tirupati Vs Building, G.T. Road, Block-I, Belurmath-711202. Pan: Altps 5888 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri S.L. Kochar & Shri A. Kochar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2024 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”] Both Dated 20.09.2023 For The Ay 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Kochar & Shri A. Kochar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 148

Deepak Kedia vs. ACIT in ITA No. 881/Kol/2023; Assessment Year 2014-15; order dt. 03/11/2023 wherein also the issue regarding the validity of service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act has been adjudicated and relevant finding of the Tribunal reads as follows:- “4. According to Ld. Counsel ... deemed to be valid even if there be infractions as detailed in said Section. The scope of the provision is to make service of notice having certain infirmities to be proper and valid if there was requisite participation on part of the assessee. It is, however, to be noted that

Subhash Sharma, Belurmath vs. ACIT, Cir-47, Kolkata.

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1099/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2024AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Kochar & Shri A. Kochar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 148

Manish Jain, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 639/KOL/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148o

filed an objection vide letter dated 16.11.2009 objecting to the issuance of notice under Section 142(1) of the Act without valid service of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. Taking note of the said letter the Tribunal, in our view, rightly held that the proviso to Section