TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1800X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned assessment order is unsustainable in law since it has been passed without the AO having jurisdiction over the Assessee issuing notice to it under Section 143(2)(a) within the prescribed time limit i.e. on or before 30th September, 2014. The impugned assessment order dated 31st March, 2016 is hereby set aside. - W.P.(C) 4014/2016 & CM No. 16938/2016 - - - Dated:- 31-5-2017 - JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR AND JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukesh Gupta Mr. Keshav Rai, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Junior Standing Counsel ORDER 1. This writ petition filed by S.K. Industries, through its partner, questions the assessment order dated 31 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e limit prescribed under the Act. This time limit was up to 30th September, 2014. Another notice was issued by Respondent No. 2 on 8th September, 2015, which was responded to by the Petitioner on 23rd March, 2016 again pointing out that these notices were beyond the prescribed limit i.e., 30 th September, 2014. Accordingly, the Petitioner requested that the assessment proceedings be dropped considering the decision of this Court on identical facts for AY 2012-13. The Petitioner in the said letter also mentioned that it had requested to ignore the assessment proceedings for AY 2013-14, where the facts were identical. By an order dated 5th May, 2015 in WP(C) No. 664/2015, this Court quashed the assessment order on the same ground, namely, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at as it may, in the considered view of the Court, the AO having jurisdiction i.e. Respondent No.1 ought to have issue a notice under Section 143(2)(a) of the Act within the prescribed time limit i.e., 30th September, 2014 in order to proceed with the assessment. Considering that a similar mistake of an AO not having jurisdiction over the Assessee issuing a notice to it had been committed earlier, there was no occasion for the Revenue to continue to repeat the same mistake and expect that it will be condoned. 9. The impugned assessment order dated 31st March, 2016 is unsustainable in law since it has been passed without the AO having jurisdiction over the Assessee issuing notice to it under Section 143(2)(a) within the prescribed time li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
