2017 (8) TMI 911

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de by the ITO, Ward 28(2), New Delhi without service of a valid notice under section 148 by him. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the additions made of Rs. 5,58,076/- on account of purchases made from Himanshi Enterprises considering the same as bogus. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified both in law and on facts in using the alleged statement of the proprietor of Himanshi Enterprises against the appellant. 5. That the appellant prays for grant of permission to add, alter, modify or substitute any or all of the grounds of appeal." PRAYER:- It is prayed that the additions confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) amounting to Rs. 5,58,076/- on account of purchases made from Himanshi Enterprises may kindly b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed that assessee had been filing its ITR at New Delhi right since the date of its incorporation and ITR for AY under appeal was filed on 30.11.2006 and PAN details since its incorporation also lies with the Delhi income tax authorities. But based on information received from the ADIT, Faridabad, the AO, Ward 1(1), Faridabad who did not had any jurisdiction over the assessee issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act and also issued notice u/s. 142(1). The Assessee informed the AO about its jurisdiction to be assessed at Delhi and requested for transfer of records at Delhi and accordingly, he transferred the case. Accordingly, the notice u/s.142(1) and 143(2) was issued by the Jurisdictional AO Ward 18(2), New Delhi for the first time on 15.10.2013 a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1), Faridabad who did not had any jurisdiction over the assessee issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act and also issued notice u/s. 142(1). The Assessee informed the AO about its jurisdiction to be assessed at Delhi and requested for transfer of records at Delhi and accordingly, the case was transferred. Accordingly, the notice u/s.142(1) and 143(2) was issued by the Jurisdictional AO Ward 18(2), New Delhi for the first time on 15.10.2013 and no notice u/s. 148 was ever issued by the jurisdictional AO. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A)'s action of confirming the validity of assessment made by the ITO, Ward 28(2), New Delhi without service of valid notice under section 148 is not sustainable in the eyes of law and needs to be quashed. My view is fortifie....