2022 (2) TMI 1187 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal invalidates reassessment due to notice issue, assessee's appeal allowed. Procedural flaw prevails over merit.

Rohtash Versus ITO, Ward-3 Hryana

The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, emphasizing the invalidity of the reassessment proceedings due to the non-service of the notice u/s. 148. ... Validity of Reassessment proceedings - mandation of servicing notice - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, although a notice has been issued by the AO, however, the same has not been served on the assessee since the notice issued by the AO through speed post was returned by the Postal Authorities unserved and there is no other evidence on record to show that the AO has made any other effort such as sending the Ward Inspector to serve the notice personally or through affixture - the reassessment proceedings finalised by the AO without serving the notice u/s. 148, in our opinion, is invalid. Therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and allow the jurisdictional ground raised by the assessee challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings. Since the assessee succeeds on this legal ground, the ground challenging the addition on merit becomes academic - Appeal of assessee allowed. Issues:Validity of assessment without jurisdiction, Addition on account of unexplained cash deposit, Initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 without reason to believe income escaped assessment, Validity of assessment without notice u/s. 148.Analysis:1. Validity of Assessment without Jurisdiction:- The appeal challenged the validity of assessment without jurisdiction, arguing that the notice u/s. 148 was not served on the assessee. The CIT(A) upheld the assessment's validity, stating that the notice was issued within the prescribed time. However, the Tribunal found that the notice was never served on the assessee, rendering the reassessment proceedings invalid as per Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Addition on Account of Unexplained Cash Deposit:- The assessee had made cash deposits into a bank account, and the Assessing Officer added a significant amount to the income due to failure in substantiating the genuineness. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, stating that the assessee failed to prove the identity of the payer and the transaction's genuineness. However, the Tribunal did not address the merit of this addition due to the invalidity of the reassessment proceedings.3. Initiation of Proceedings u/s. 147 without Reason to Believe Income Escaped Assessment:- The proceedings under Section 147 were initiated based on information regarding cash deposits. The Tribunal did not delve into this issue due to the primary focus on the invalidity of the reassessment proceedings.4. Validity of Assessment without Notice u/s. 148:- The core issue revolved around the non-service of the notice u/s. 148 on the assessee. The Tribunal found that the notice was not served as it was returned by the Postal Authorities, and no further attempts were made to serve it. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings were deemed invalid, leading to the allowance of the appeal by the assessee.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, emphasizing the invalidity of the reassessment proceedings due to the non-service of the notice u/s. 148. This decision rendered the merit-based challenges secondary and not addressed, focusing solely on the procedural flaw.