TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 353
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e impugned order is opposed to law and facts of the case insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Appellant. 2) The impugned order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 passed by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the NFAC is legally invalid, bad-in-law and void ab initio inasmuch they failed to appreciate that the notice u/s 148 of the Act is barred by limitation since it is served beyond the time limit specified u/s 149 of the Act as it stood at that point of time. 3) The impugned order is passed by the NFAC is erroneous and bad in law inasmuch as he failed to appreciate that the Assessment Order itself is void ab initio, illegal and bad in law since the Ld. AO failed to appreciate that the Asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom DDIT (Inv.), Unit 1(2), Bengaluru, assessee had suppressed turnover in the Profit & Loss account submitted to the department when compared to the financial statements submitted to Punjab National Bank. Accordingly after obtaining approval from the competent authority the case was reopened u/s. 147 by issue of notice u/s. 148 to the assessee on 28.03.2018 served on 02.04.2018. In response the assessee filed letter dated 09.11.2018 stating that the return filed on 29.09.2011 be treated as return filed in response to notice u/s. 148. Accordingly statutory notices were issued to the assessee. 3. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to file certain details regarding break up of sundry creditors, sundry deb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. He submitted that the whether notice u/s. 148 is issued or served within the time limit provided in section 149 has been examined by various High Courts and the ld. AR relied on the Hon'ble Madras High Court judgment in the case of Smt. Parveen Amin Bhathara v. ITO [2022] 143 taxmann.com 353 (Madras) wherein on similar facts it was held that notice u/s. 148 served after the expiry of six years from the end of the relevant year was held barred by limitation. Further he submitted that during the course of reassessment proceedings financial creditors consisting of PNB, SBI and others filed application before the NCLT seeking to admit and initiate corporate insolvency resolution process as per section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....years as per section 149 of the Act that notice was issued on 28.3.2018 and duly served to the assessee on 02.04.2018. The section is very much clear that notice should be issued within specified time provided under the Act and the AO has done so. There is no specific words regarding service of notice to the assessee within the specified time limit. Accordingly there is no error in the issue of notice. 7. The ld. DR submitted that the case law relied by the ld. AR in the Madras High Court judgment in the case of Smt. Parveen Amin Bhathara noted supra is distinguishable on facts. In that case there was no proof of service of notice to the assessee. Here in the case on hand, there is no dispute that notice was issued on 28.03.2018 which wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s no dispute regarding the service of notice on 02.04.2018. The AO issued notice u/s. 142(1) which was complied and the AO reassessed the income @ Rs.52.02 crores against which the ld. FAA restriction the addition to the tune of Rs.1170.368 lakhs. 11. The assessee has taken ground No.2 that notice u/s. 148 issued is barred by limitation which is not correct sine the notice was issued within the period of six years on 28.03.2018 and there is no dispute regarding issuance of notice which was duly served on 02.04.2018. We have gone through the provisions of the Act, it talks about the issue of notice, the section 149 is very much clear that notice must be issued within the period as per section 149(1)(a)/(b). The section talks about the tim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Directors with immediate effect. The Interim Resolution Professional/Resolution Professional will provide and intimate the fees for the period he has functioned and costs of the 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' incurred by him to the Financial Creditor. The IRP/Resolution Professional will handover the assets and records of the Corporate Debtor to its Board of Director." 13. It is clear from the above judgment that the financial creditor petition has been dismissed and at the time of passing the order, the AO had no any information about the NCLT order. The assessee is unable to show that the information was given to the jurisdictional assessing officer before passing the reassessment order Accordingly ground No.3 is rejected.....