9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 294X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer issued notice under Section 148 on 7.4.2006. The said notice was issued to the assessee without obtaining approval of the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax. In response to the notice, the assessee filed the same return, which he filed on 31.10.2000, showing the income as originally returned. This was on 22.5.2006. Thereafter on 14.7.2006, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee. Thereupon, the proceedings issued dropped on account of the absence of approval of the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax. 3. Thereafter, approval of the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax was obtained and on 4.12.2006, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued requiring the assessee to file his return within thirty days of service of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal. 6. We heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 7. The first contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant was that notice under Section 143(2) is to be issued only in a case where a return is filed. According to the learned counsel, in response to the notice under Section 148, the assessee did not file any return within thirty days service of notice and instead, he filed a copy of the return that he had filed as early as on 31.10.2000, along with the statements. It is stated that when a notice is issued under Section 148, the assessee has the option of filing a fresh return or giving a statement opting for the earlier return. The learned counsel contende ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liging them to issue notice under Section 143(2). This argument of the learned counsel for the Revenue was resisted by the learned counsel for the respondent, contending that by the notice issued under Section 142(1) issued on 5.10.2007, assessee was called upon to file a return and it was in compliance of that requirement, the return in question was filed. Therefore, the counsel contended that the return was a validly filed one entitling the assessee for a notice under Section 143(2). 10. The notice under Section 148 was issued to the assessee on 4.12.2006. By this notice, the assessee was called upon to file the return within 30 days of service of the notice. This notice was served on the assessee on 7.12.2006. The assessee did not reque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not come into operation whatsoever. 12. This, therefore, means that the return, if any, filed by the assessee on 15.10.2007 was not a valid return, which could have been acted upon by the Assessing Officer entitling the assessee for a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income- tax Act. Therefore, the conclusion of the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner(Appeals) is perfectly legal and the view taken by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal that in the absence of a notice under Section 143(2) the assessment is illegal cannot be sustained. The order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in I.T.A.No.70//Coch/2009 will stand set aside. 13. Since the appeal was decided entirely on the legal question discussed above, we remit the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
