AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 249
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned exparte assessment framed by AO is void ab initio for want of mandatory service of jurisdictional notice u/s. 143(2) at latest available address. Prayer to call: Case records (if deemed appropriate) 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned exparte assessment framed by AO is void ab inito for which straight prayer is made to call for case records from the office of AO. Addition of Rs. 60,29,000/- wrongly sustained by CIT(A) on merits. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 60,29,000/- on basis of perverse fin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued on 19-08-2010 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Gurgaon fixing the case for 06-09-2010 and duly served. Thereafter, the case transferred to the ITO, Ward 1(1), Gurgaon as the jurisdiction over the case lies with him. Accordingly, notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 alongwtth detailed questionnaire were issued on 8.6.2011 and case was fixed for hearing on 22.6.2011 and duly served. Thereafter, various opportunities were allowed to the assessee by issuing notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of I.T. Act, however, the assessee has not made any compliance. As per AO, the assessee was not cooperating in the matter of finalization of assessment proceedings and it was of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ramed u/s. 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961. He stated that no notice u/s. 143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 was served upon the assessee, as a result of which critical evidence pertaining to the additions made by the AO could not be submitted during the assessment proceedings. He further stated that Ld. CIT(A) in his order at page no. 6 & 7 vided para no. 3.4 has held that the AO has not commented upon the fact that the assessee could not get notice u/s. 143(2)/142(1) of the Income Tax Act, because of which there was no compliance on her part and additions were made in the order u/s. 144 of the Act. Therefore, he stated that the present case has involved the legal issue of non-service of mandatory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act which is squarely covere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 regarding the non-issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the I.T. Act, which goes to the root of the matter, can be taken up first and decide according to the facts and circumstances of the case law cited by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee. 7.1 We find that Ld. CIT(A) in his impugned order vide para no. 3.4 & 3.5 at page no. 6 & 7 has observed as under:- "3.4 I have considered the facts of the case together with the submissions of the appellant and the report of the AO on the admissibility of additional evidence. It has been submitted by the appellant that notices 143(2)/142(1) of the Income Tax Act could not be served on her, as a result of which critical evidence pertaining to the additions made by the AO could not be submitted d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing before the Assessing Officer any evidence which is relevant to any ground of appeal; or a) Where the Assessing Officer has made the order appealed against without giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidenced relevant to any ground of appeal." 3.5 After considering the facts of the case and in the light of the four circumstances mentioned in Rule 46A, I hold that the appellant's case is covered by Rule 46A(1)(b) and (c) of the Income Tax Rules. Hence, considering the facts of the case, particularly, the non-service of notices u/s. 143(2)/142(1), the amount involved and in the interest of justice and fair play, the additional evidence filed....