TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 1378
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(4), Amritsar, [in brevity ' the AO'] order passed u/s 144 of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds: That the order passed u/s 250(6)of the Income Tax Act, is bad in law and against the facts of the case. 2. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that the AO had erred in law in making assessment without issuing notice u/s 143(2). 3. That the Ld.CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in sustaining the order passed by the ITO Ward 5(4) in which the Ld. AO has assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 49210360/- as against returned income of Rs. 426860 by making an addition of Rs. 34699498/- on account of credit entries appearing in bank acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the AO for application of section 115BBE on the cash deposited and credit entries by invoking section 69A. That the provisions of section 69A can be invoked only when whole of such alleged money, bullion, jewellery, or valuable article has escaped assessment or remains unexplained. 10. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is heard and disposed off." 3. The appeal was filed with a delay of 71 days. The assessee filed a condonation petition and placed that due to medical emergency the assessee was unable to submit the appeal within the time. The relevant short delay is duly condoned with the consent of ld. DR. Accordingly, the del....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee can agitate the additional ground before the bench and respectfully relied on the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v Commissioner of Income-tax, [1998] 97 Taxman 358 (SC). The ld. AR for the assessee placed the following dates and events related to proof of non-issuance of notice u/s 143(2) by the revenue which is duly extracted as below:-   6.2 The ld. AR relied on the following orders by challenging the jurisdiction of assessing authority related non-issuance of notice u/s 143(2) which caused assessment bad in law. Here, we placed the following judicial rulings as follow:- 6.2.1 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. S.K. Industries, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the purpose of block assessments. We do not agree with the submissions of the learned counsel for the revenue, since we do not see any reason to restrict the scope and meaning of the expression 'so far as may be apply'. In our view, where the Assessing Officer in repudiation of the return filed under section 158BC(a) proceeds to make an enquiry, he has necessarily to follow the provisions of section 142, sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 143. 17. Section 158BH provides for application of the other provisions of the Act. It reads : "Save as otherwise provided in this Chapter, all the other provisions of this Act shall apply to assessment made under this Chapter". This is an enabling provision, which makes all the prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....paid the tax in any manner, shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him, on a date to be specified therein, either to attend the office of the Assessing Officer or to produce, or cause to be produced before the Assessing Officer any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support of the return: Provided that no notice under this sub-section shall be served on the assessee after the expiry of six months from the end of the financial year in which the return is furnished.]" 7. In Asstt. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon [2010] 188 Taxman 113/321 ITR 362, on the question as to whether issue of notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act within the prescribed time for the purpose of block assessment under chapter- XIV B of the Act ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the prescribed time. The ld. DR has also not brought anything on record contrary to the arguments advanced by the ld. AR for the assessee. Thus, in the absence of the valid statutory notice, the assessment framed under section 144 of the Act is not sustainable. Hence, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed. Accordingly, the assessment for impugned assessment year 2017-18 is bad in law and liable to be quashed. The addition amount of Rs. 4,87,83,498/- is deleted. As this appeal has been decided on the short ground of jurisdiction in the assessment for non-issuance of notice U/s 143(2)so the Ground no-2 is fully allowed in favour of the assessee. We see no need to deal with the merits of the additions and the issue involved in othe....