2022 (9) TMI 974

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... year 2010-11. The impugned order was originated from the order of Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(3), Bathinda (in brevity A.O) order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act date of order 27.12.2017. 2. The assessee has taken following grounds, which are re-produced as below: 1. The ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law by upholding the validity of service of notice was neither received by the assessee (as he was living in Canada during the said period) nor by any person duly authorized by him. 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in confirmation the action of the AO regarding initiated of proceedings u/s.147 of the Act for verification of source of cash deposits in the saving bank account of the assessee which is not permissible und....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the assessee in their statements before the AO for financially helping the assessee, who wanted to leave India and settle in Canada. 7. That the ld. CIT(A) seriously erred on facts and law in confirming the arbitrary and unlawful ex-parte assessment at a total income of Rs.15,17,500/- without appreciating that section 68 of the Act cannot apply to bank statement etc. which makes the addition as bad in law. 8. That the ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in confirming the exparte assessment orders passed by the ld. AO u/s. 144 dated 27.12.2017 in violation of principles of natural justice because neither notice u/s. 148 nor any other statutory notice was ever received by the assessee nor his authorized representative whic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cts and the legal grounds. The assessee raised two legal grounds. One related to service of the notice and second related to reopening of assessment as per information of AIR data. The ITAT adjudicated both the grounds as below: - 4. During the hearing before ITAT, the ld. Counsel vehemently argued and relied on the legal grounds of the assessee. The ld. counsel first challenged the jurisdiction of AO for completing the assessment regarding non issuance of notice u/s.148 as the assessee had left India and permanently staying in Canada. In the affixture of the notice no witness was signed. So the entire affixture is illegal and void. The Assessing Authority issue the notice dated 30.03.2017 through Speed Post. Also affixture was made on 3....