Scrutiny assessment invalid without proper notice under section 143(2) - department failed to prove issuance

Punnu Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. Versus ITO, Ward-5 (4), Amritsar.

Punnu Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. Versus ITO, Ward-5 (4), Amritsar. - TMI Issues Involved:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2017-18, challenging the assessment made by the Income Tax Officer under section 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961.

Grounds Raised by Assessee:
1. Challenge to the order passed under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act.
2. Non-issuance of notice under section 143(2) by the Assessing Officer.
3. Disagreement with the assessment of total income by the Income Tax Officer.
4. Assertion that addition made on account of cash deposit and credit entries is beyond the scope of operation clean money.
5. Dispute regarding non-production of certain financial records by the assessee.
6. Submission of return of income and cash book during demonetization period.
7. Claim that cash deposits represent legitimate business proceeds.
8. Allegation of failure to consider evidence by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
9. Dispute over the application of section 115BBE and section 69A by the Assessing Officer.

Decision and Analysis:
The appeal was filed with a delay of 71 days, which was condoned due to a medical emergency. The Assessing Officer did not issue a notice under section 143(2) to the assessee, which was deemed crucial for a valid assessment. The absence of this notice rendered the assessment bad in law, in accordance with legal precedents such as the case of Hotel Blue Moon. As a result, the addition made on account of cash deposits and credit entries was deleted, and the assessment for the year 2017-18 was quashed.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory requirements such as issuing notices under the Income Tax Act for valid assessments. The decision was based on legal principles established by the Supreme Court, highlighting the significance of procedural compliance in tax assessments.