DCIT CC 5-1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED , MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

reassessment proceedings carried out is bad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed written submission in respect of this ground of appeal and the same is reproduced as under: “The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of the Act does not bear a manual or digital signature. (Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

reassessment proceedings carried out is bad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed written submission in respect of this ground of appeal and the same is reproduced as under: “The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of the Act does not bear a manual or digital signature. (Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

reassessment proceedings carried out is bad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed written submission in respect of this ground of appeal and the same is reproduced as under: “The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of the Act does not bear a manual or digital signature. (Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

reassessment proceedings carried out is bad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed written submission in respect of this ground of appeal and the same is reproduced as under: “The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of the Act does not bear a manual or digital signature. (Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1) , MUMBAI

section 282A is that notice or other\ndocument to be issued by any Income-tax Authority\nshall be signed by that authority. The word \"and\"\nhas been used in sub-section (1), in conjunctive\nsense, meaning thereby that such notice or other\ndocument has first to be signed by the authority\nand thereafter it may be issued either in paper

DCIT CC 5 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings carried out is\nbad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed\nwritten submission in respect of this ground of appeal\nand the same is reproduced as under:\n“The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of\nthe Act does not bear a manual or digital signature.\n(Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings carried out is \nbad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed \nwritten submission in respect of this ground of appeal \nand the same is reproduced as under:\n“The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of\nthe Act does not bear a manual or digital signature.\n(Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

HAZEL MERCANTILE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings should have followed the amended procedures. Since they did not, the assessment orders passed under the unamended provisions were quashed.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 147", "Section 148", "Section 148A", "Section 149", "Section 151", "Section 69C", "Section 10AA", "Section 115JB", "Section 282A

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

reassessment is bad in law.”\n22\nJ Kumar Infraprojects Ltd.\n3. New Nobel Education Society v. CCIT 2022 INSC\n1111\nComments: The Department has relied on the above case\nlaws to interpret the statue. It is not doubted that the words\n“and” and “or” have separate significance. The Department’s\ninterpretation of section 282A

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings carried out is\nbad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed\nwritten submission in respect of this ground of appeal\nand the same is reproduced as under:\n“The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of\nthe Act does not bear a manual or digital signature.\n(Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

DCIT CC 5 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings carried out is\nbad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed\nwritten submission in respect of this ground of appeal\nand the same is reproduced as under:\n“The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of\nthe Act does not bear a manual or digital signature.\n(Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

DCIT CC 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HAZEL MERCANTILE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Additional Ground No 2 raised in appeal preferred by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2016-17 is allowed,

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

282A of the Act. 2. Without prejudice to ground 1 above, if Hon'ble ITAT concludes that the impugned Notices were issued on or after 1st April, 2021, then, the new regime of Section 147, 148, 148A, 149 and 151 of the Act of 1961, shall govern these reassessment

HAZEL MERCANTILE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Additional Ground No 2 raised in appeal preferred by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2016-17 is allowed,

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

282A of the Act. 2. Without prejudice to ground 1 above, if Hon'ble ITAT concludes that the impugned Notices were issued on or after 1st April, 2021, then, the new regime of Section 147, 148, 148A, 149 and 151 of the Act of 1961, shall govern these reassessment

DCIT CC-4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HAZEL MERCANTILE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Additional Ground No 2 raised in appeal preferred by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2016-17 is allowed,

282A of the Act. 2. Without prejudice to ground 1 above, if Hon'ble ITAT concludes that the impugned Notices were issued on or after 1st April, 2021, then, the new regime of Section 147, 148, 148A, 149 and 151 of the Act of 1961, shall govern these reassessment

HASHMAT ISHAQ PARAR,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Section 282A having not been followed while issuing the notice u/s 148 the\nsame is invalid.\nReliance is placed on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Prakash\nKrishnaraoBharadwaj (Copy enclosed) where in the High Court, in connection with unsigned\nnotice u/s 148, has held that such unsigned notice, either physically or digitally invalid

HASHMAT ISHAQ PARKER,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 282A having not been followed while issuing the notice u/s 148 the same is invalid. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Prakash KrishnaraoBharadwaj (Copy enclosed) where in the High Court, in connection with unsigned notice u/s 148, has held that such unsigned notice, either physically or digitally invalid

DCIT CC 5 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings carried out is\nbad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed\nwritten submission in respect of this ground of appeal\nand the same is reproduced as under:\n“The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of\nthe Act does not bear a manual or digital signature.\n(Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book

DCIT CC 5 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings carried out is \nbad in law and liable to be quashed. The Assessee filed \nwritten submission in respect of this ground of appeal \nand the same is reproduced as under:\n“The alleged sanction obtained under section 151 of \nthe Act does not bear a manual or digital signature. \n(Page 114 to 131 of Paper Book