TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5.2013. No notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued by the Department on or after 23.05.2013. According to us the assessment framed without issuing a notice under section 143(2) when the return was filed by the assessee in response to notice under section 148 the assessment framed is bad in law. Accordingly, assessment is quashed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1744/Mum/2016 And ITA No. 1466/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 3-10-2018 - SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM For The Appellant : S/Shri SE Dastur And Hiten Chande ARs For The Respondent : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, CIT DR ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: These cross appeals are arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)], in appeal No. CIT(A)- 50/IT-116/2014-15, dated 27.01.2016. The Assessment was framed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(2), Mumbai (in short DCIT/ AO ) for the A.Y. 2010-11 vide order dated 19/03/2015 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ). 2. The first issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.05.2013 which was received in the office of the ACIT, Central Circle-45, Mumbai on 23.05.2013. It means that the return of income was filed on 23.05.2013 in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. The learned Counsel for the assessee now before us stated that when no notice under section 143(2) of the Act, which is a jurisdictional notice, is issued to the assessee in response to return filed under section 148 of the Act, the assessment framed is invalid and bad in law. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in of ACIT vs. Geno Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2013) 32 taxmann.com 162 (Bombay) in CIT vs. Ms. Malvika Arun Somaiya (2010) 2 taxmann.com 144 (Bombay) and Hon ble Delhi high Court in the case of DIT vs. Society for Worldwide Inter Bank Financial, Telecommunications (2010)323 ITR 249 (Delhi) and also Tribunal s decision of Delhi Bench in ITAs No. 5163 5164/Del/2010, 5554/Del/2012 for AY 2004-5 2005-06 vide order dated 02.07.2018. When these facts were pointed to the learned CIT Departmental Representative, he only relied on the orders of the lower authorities and on this jurisdictional issue he could not controvert th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon ble Bombay High Court Geno Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (supra), wherein it is held as under: - 5. Apart from that, it is an admitted position that no notice under Section 143(2) had been issued while making assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147. The Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 has held that the Tribunal has discretion to allow or not to allow a new ground to be raised. But in a case where the Tribunal is only required to consider the question of law arising from facts which are on record in the assessment proceedings, there is no reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee. The ITAT, after relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in R. Dalmia v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480/102 Taxman 702, came to the conclusion that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory. The ITAT has taken into consideration the relevant provisions and has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court and relying on the said judgments, the ITAT has held that notice under Section 143(2) is m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, allowance or relief made in the return is inadmissible, serve on the assessee a notice specifying particulars of such claim of loss, exemption, deduction, allowance or relief and require him, on a date to be specified therein to produce, or cause to be produced, any evidence or particulars specified therein or on which the assessee may rely, in support of such claim. (ii) Notwithstanding the aforesaid, if the Assessing Officer considers it necessary or expedient to ensure that the assessee has not under-stated the income or has not computed excessive loss or has not under-paid the tax in any manner, he may serve the assessee a notice requiring him, on a date to be specified therein, either to attend his office or to produce, or cause to be produced, any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support return. 8. The provisions of Section 143(2) make it clear that the notice can only be served after the Assessing Officer has examined the return filed by the assessee. Whereas what para 3.4 indicates is that when the assessee came to file the return, the notice under Section 143(2) was served upon the Authorized Representative by hand. Thus, even if we take the stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
