2008 (1) TMI 884 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal allows appeal due to jurisdictional error in notice issuance naming individual instead of HUF. Precedents cited.

KARAMSHIBHAI M. THUMAR (HUF) Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal was allowed as the Tribunal found that the notice issued in the name of an individual instead of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) was a ... - Issues involved: Validity of assessment based on notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act.Summary:The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) regarding the validity of the assessment due to the absence of a notice under section 143(2) served on the appellant. The AO issued a notice in the name of an individual instead of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) of the assessee, leading to objections from the assessee. The AO justified the notice based on specific categories for scrutiny prescribed by the CBDT. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, prompting the assessee to refer to a Tribunal decision where a similar error led to an assessment without jurisdiction. The Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities, citing a Madras High Court decision on irregularities in issuing notices under section 143(2). The Tribunal considered various precedents and held that the notice issued was not valid, leading to the cancellation of the assessment. The decision favored the assessee, and the appeal was allowed.In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the notice issued in the name of an individual instead of the HUF was a jurisdictional error, rendering the assessment invalid. The decision was based on legal precedents and the specific circumstances of the case, resulting in the cancellation of the assessment and the allowance of the assessee's appeal.