Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Mukesh Kumar Versus ITO

2015 (6) TMI 1142 - ITAT, DELHI

Validity of notice after case being transferred - Reopening of assessment - file transferred by ITO Ward-26(4) to ITO Ward - 26(3) noticing jurisdiction over the appellant - Held that:- ITO Ward-26(3), New Delhi had proceeded with the framing assessment without issuing fresh notice u/s 148. It means that ITO Ward-26(4), New Delhi had no valid jurisdiction over the appellant, at the time of issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. In such circumstances, it was held by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n is whether the action of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-26(3) New Delhi was valid in law in concluding the assessment proceedings based on the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-26(4) who had no valid jurisdiction to issue the notice. The issue of valid jurisdiction is a condition precedent to the validity of any assessment under Section 147 of the Act; therefore, the assessment made pursuant to such notice is bad in law. Thus no hesitation to quash the re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2 for the assessment year 2004-05. These grounds raised in this appeal are as under: 1. That the learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts by upholding assessment order framed by assessing officer u/s 144/147 of the Act, determining the alleged total income of ₹ 4,53,179/- against the income returned of ₹ 1,13,710/- by taking recourse to the provisions of section 147/148 of the IT Act and inter alia making wholly unwarranted addition of ₹ 9,13,710/- on account of unexpl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on of the assessee without looking in to the detail. 3. That the assessment as framed is ab-initio being without jurisdiction as same has been framed without confronting to the assessee any material or evidence received from the DIT (Inv)-I, New Delhi, to show that the assessee has received bogus accommodation entry amounting to ₹ 9,13,710/-. The assessment has been made on complete non application of mind. Learned CIT(A) ignored the reply/rebut of remand report submitted by the assessee. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ity to the instant case. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual. He filed return of income for A.Y. 2004-05 subsequently on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing, New Delhi that the appellant had received an entry of ₹ 4 lac from one Shri Trilok Chand Bansal on 3rd September 2003 and ₹ 4 lac from Shri Subhash Gupta on 4th September 2003, a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued on 16th March 2009. In response to sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ined to complete assessment ex parte by bringing to tax the said amount of ₹ 8 lac. 3. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi, who vide order dated 1st March 2012 in Appeal No.95/11-12 had dismissed the appeal. It was contended before the ld. CIT(A) that the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 are invalid in law, inasmuch, as there were no reasons to believe that the assessment got escaped tax. It was further contended that the notice issue u/s 148 w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e us. 4. No one was present on behalf of the appellant. Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative has placed reliance on the order of the lower authorities. 5. We perused the relevant material on record. In the present case the notice u/s 148 was issued on 2nd March 2009 by ITO Ward-26(4) New Delhi. After receipt of notice the appellant had responded through its authorized Representative and submitted the copy of the return filed under provisions of section 139. After noticing that the jurisdiction ov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version