Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 653 - ITAT DELHIValidity of reopening of assessment - onus to prove the service of notice - Notice u/s 148 is not a valid notice - HELD THAT:- It is settled position in law that valid notice u/s 148 of the Act is a jurisdictional requirement must be complied with this contention of assessee is supported by case of Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Rajesh Kumar Sharma [2007 (8) TMI 322 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Non-service of notice u/s 148 - It is relevant to mention assessment u/s 147/143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Act has been framed without service of notice u/s 148 of the Act and this action of AO is contravention section 148 of the Act, which impose binding condition on the Assessing Officer to serve on the notice u/s 148 of the Act before making assessment u/s 147. It is settled position in law that service of notice under section 148 of the Act is a jurisdictional requirement must be complied with and the onus to prove the service of notice lies upon the Revenue and this contention of assessee is supported by the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chetan Gupta [2015 (9) TMI 756 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. Thus as service of notice under section 148 of the Act is a jurisdictional requirement must be complied with and the onus to prove the service of notice lies upon the Revenue, we hold that the re-assessment proceedings completed without service of valid notice u/s 148 of the Act are liable to be quashed. Decided in favour of assessee.
|