Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 1205 - AT - Income TaxAssessment u/s 144C - notice of demand u/s. 156 and notice u/s. 271(1)(c) sent - AR contended that the said draft assessment order was sent by the A.O. along with the demand notice and the penalty notice was also sent, which implies that the A.O. has not followed the mandatory procedures prescribed by the Act and cannot be considered as a mere procedural irregularity - HELD THAT:- As decided in the case of Vijay Television (P.) Ltd. [2014 (6) TMI 540 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] which has held that when there is an omission by the A.O. in following the mandatory procedure prescribed by the law, then the said omission cannot be considered as a mere procedural irregularity and the same cannot be cured. Aker Powergas P. Ltd. (2022 (6) TMI 1118 - ITAT MUMBAI]), which has held that the issuing of draft assessment order along with the demand notice is said to be not following the mandatory provisions of the Act as per section 144C of the Act, wherein the assessment order was treated as void. The said decision by the Tribunal has considered various decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Hon'ble High Court decision in the case of Sun Engineering Works [1992 (9) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT]and various other decisions. We would also place our reliance on the decision of Atlas Copco (India) Limited [2019 (8) TMI 1415 - ITAT PUNE] which held that the issuance of notice of demand at the stage of draft order has brought a finality to the assessment at the stage of the draft order itself and the resultant final assessment is vitiated in law and is unsustainable. Thus assessment order passed subsequent to the issue of draft assessment order along with the demand notice has been held to be bad in law and not just mere procedural defect. Appeal of assessee allowed.
|