2023 (5) TMI 1445 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment order invalid due to non-service of mandatory notice under section 143(2) of Income-tax Act

Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore

ITAT Bangalore allowed assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14, setting aside the assessment order due to non-service of mandatory notice under section 143(2) of ... Non service of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) - pre requisite / condition for assessment to be valid - HELD THAT:- We have not found any noting for the issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we have to accept the assessee's contention that there is no service of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, and therefore, the assessment order is to be set aside on this ground alone. It is also a fact that the assessee has brought to the notice of the A.O. during the course of assessment proceedings that there was no service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. AO has not addressed this issue in the assessment order. Further, before the CIT(A), the assessee has taken up the ground that there was no service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. However, there was no adjudication on the ground raised by the assessee. We are constrained to set aside the assessment order, since there is no valid service of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. The Appellate Tribunal (ITAT Bangalore) allowed the assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2013-14, holding that the assessment order was invalid due to non-service of the mandatory notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The tribunal emphasized that 'the pre requisite / condition for assessment to be valid being service of the mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act... having not been complied with makes the impugned assessment order bad in law.' The assessee had raised this ground before both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), but it was neither addressed nor adjudicated. Upon review of the assessment records, the tribunal found no evidence of issuance or service of the notice u/s 143(2). Relying on precedents including CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon and CIT v. Laxmandas Khandelwal, the tribunal concluded that 'there is no valid service of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act,' and accordingly set aside the assessment order solely on this ground. The appeal was thus allowed.