TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 110
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore us the assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the re-assessment proceedings initiated u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the assessment order passed without issuing notice u/s.143(2) of the Act. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.24,00,000/- made as income from other sources u/s.56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend or omit all or any of the grounds of appeal." 2. On the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s.143(3)/148 of the Act, dated 21.11.2016 added the amount of Rs.24 lacs (supra) as the income of the assessee from "other sources". Also, the Assessing Officer determined the LTCG on sale of the aforesaid property in question at Rs.5,25,810/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals) but without any success. 5. The assesee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals) has carried the matter in appeal before us. As the assessee appellant despite having been intimated about the hearing of appeal had failed to put up an appearance before us, therefore, we are constrained to proceed with and dispose off the appeal as per Rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, i.e, after hearing the res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, dated 14.10.2016, the CIT(Appeals) was of the view that said notice could be viewed as a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act. Accordingly, on the basis of his aforesaid observations the CIT(Appeals) upheld the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.143(3)/148 of the Act, dated 21.11.2016. For the sake of clarity and in order to dispel any doubt the observations of the CIT(Appeals) are reproduced as under: "2.3. First, taking the addition ground taken by the appellant challenging the validity of order passed u/s.143(3)/148 as not return of income was filed by him either u/s.139 or u/s.147. As per the assessee in case of no return, the assessment cannot be made u/s.143(3)/147. On going through the assessment order I find that AO has d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y return of income u/s.139 of the Act or in response to the notice issued u/s. 148. Also, no notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was ever issued by the Assessing Officer. In our considered view, the issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act presupposes the existence of a valid return of income filed by the assessee which we are afraid was never so filed in the case of the assessee before us. Backed by our aforesaid observations, we are of the considered view that now when the assessee had not filed any return of income either u/s.139 of the Act, or in compliance to the notice u/s.148 of the Act, therefore, there was no justification on the part of the Assessing Officer to have framed the impugned assessment u/s.143(3)/148 of the Act, dated 21.11.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT(Appeals), and rightly so, in the absence of any return of income having been filed by him, no assessment u/s.143(3)/148 of the Act could have been framed in his hands. Adverting to the observation of the CIT(Appeals) that notice(s) issued u/s.142(1) of the Act, dated 16.09.2016 and 04.10.2016 could be viewed as a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act, though, is not germane to the claim of the assessee, but we may herein clarify that the same is even otherwise absolutely misconceived and misplaced. In our considered view, the framing of an assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act presupposes the issuance of a notice u/s.143(2), the existence of which by no means or stretch of imagination can be substituted by a notice issued u/s.142(1) of the Act. Our af....