AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 737
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the order passed under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), is contrary to law and facts, and the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the Learned Assessing Officer in making an addition of Rs. 3,02,35,000/- in respect of cash deposited in current account, under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That the assessment framed under section 147 is bad in law as the notice under section 148 was issued on 13.04.2021 without adhering to the new procedure applicable from 01.04.2021, specifically without complying with the provisions of section 148A. 3. That the CIT(E) has err....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Income Tax. 8. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend and alter the grounds of appeal. 3. The Ld. AR explained that there was bonafide reason for the delay of 171 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal as the impugned order passed under section 250 of the Act, by the commissioner of income tax appeals for the assessment year 2017-18 the was with CA Kapil Agarwal and due to the unfortunate passing of CA Kapil Agarwal, the appellant was unaware of the order u/s 250 of the act, as the document and information regarding the order were not promptly transferred to him. Further he explained that as soon as the assessee became aware of the situation, he appointed Mr Virsain Agrawal and advocate Rohit Kapoor as new cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AO, affixed on the notice. Meaning thereby that in the absence of affixation of signature of the A.O., either manually or digitally on the notice u/s. 148 voids the entire reassessment. 6. It is also noted that the notice u/s 148 and notices u/s 142(1) dated 04.10.2021 and 29.11.2021 were not served on the registered email ID i.e. [email protected]' of the appellant. In our view, the service of notice is an essential condition to complete the act of issuance which has been complied with on 13.04.2021 i.e. after the introduction of new provisions of income tax act, 1961. Thus, the notice u/s 148 was without complying with the procedure as per the amended act as substituted by Finance Act, 2021 which requires the issuance of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 148 which were received by petitioners on or after 1-4-2021 - Said notices were dated 31-3-2021 or before and were also digitally signed on or before 31-3-2021 - It was noted that Allahabad High Court in case Daujee Abhushan Bhandar (P.) Ltd v. UOI [2022] 136 taxmann.com 246, held that point of time when a digitally signed notice in form of electronic record would be entered in computer resources outside control of originator i.e. Assessing Officer, that shall be date and time of issuance of notice under section 148 read with section 149 - Whether, therefore, following said judgment mere digitally signing of notice would not be issuance of notice and impugned notices would be said to be digitally issued on date when same were emailed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 31-3-2021, but same were dispatched on or after 1-4-2021 Assessee challenged validity of notices issued under section 148 - Whether function of generation of notice on ITBA portal and digital signing of notice is executed by Assessing Officer while function of drafting of e-mail to which notice is attached and triggering e-mail to assessee is performed by I TBA e-mail software system - Held, yes - Whether thus mere generation of notice under section 148 on I TBA software cannot in fact or in law constitute issue of notice, it is only upon due dispatch that notice can be said to have been 'issued' - Held, yes - Whether 'dispatch' as per section 13 of Act of 2000 is sine qua non for issuance of Notice through electronic mail ....