TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 269
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....il ID provided in Form 35 was [email protected]. The screenshot of the email mentioned by therefore, had no reason to suspect that the order had been passed and communicated. 4. It was only much later, during a routine inspection of records on the Income Tax Portal, that the appellant was apprised about the passing of the impugned order by the Worthy CIT(A) dtd. 05.12.2024. The appellant immediately swung into action and filed the present appeal which got delayed by 127 days" 3. The aforesaid reasons were confronted to the Ld. Sr. DR, who could not controvert the above fact situation, hence, we find that the assessee came to know about the Ld. CIT(A)'s order dated 5.12.2024 in June, 2025 and immediately thereafter the assessee filed the appeal on 5.7.2025. We find that the reasons stated by the assessee in its condonation petition, noted above, are sufficient and reasonable cause in establishing belated filing of appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee first of all drew our attention to the revised ground no. 2 and 3 of the appeal which reads as under: "2. That on the facts, circumsta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lier principal place at Unit No 651-655, Sixth Floor, JMD Megapolis, Sohna Road, Sector-48, Gurgaon - 122018 to 7th floor, Block-I, Vatika Business Park, Sohna Road, Sector-49, Gurgaon-122018 which was clearly stated in the ITR filed for FY 2018-19. Moreover, the name of the company was changed from Oppo Mobiles (NR) Private Limited to Boang Technology Private Limited in April, 2019 and due to such name change email id of the company was also changed. The updated email id of the company has been stated in the latest ITR. Due to the above reason, the notice was not received by the assessee. Therefore, the assessment order has been passed without serving the notice on the assessee company. Even otherwise, the AO has completed the assessment u/s. 144 of the Act wherein he has disallowed entire expenditure on sales and business promotion of Rs. 90.74 crores without stating any reason or section under which it has been disallowed and without appreciating the fact that the sales of the assessee company during the year was Rs. 872.16 crores. The disallowance of genuine business expenditure has resulted into huge demand of Rs. 16.18 crores. Against the above, assessee preferred the appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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". 8. We note that the provisions of section 139(5) for revised return are reproduced as under: "139(5) If any person, having furnished a return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (4), discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier". 9. It has been held in various judgements, that the revised return filed steps into the shoes of Original Return and deemed to have been filed from the date of original return. This is important from the view of carrying forward of losses and other provisions of the Ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Assessee. The return would then relate back to the original filing date" 13. In view of the aforesaid discussions and respectfully following the precedents, we note that in the instant case the original return was filed on 31.10.2017 and rectified return was filed on 13.06.2018 to remove the deficiencies pointed out by CPC, notice u/s 143(2) can be issued upto 30.09.2018 and therefore notice issued on 22.09.2019 is time barred and thus not a valid notice and consequently the assessment order passed in the present case is void ab inito and thus deserve to be quashed on this count. We hold and direct accordingly. 14. As regards ground no. 3 relating to non-receipt of notice u/s. 143(2) is concerned, we note that as per provisions of section 143(3), for making assessment u/s 143(3), AO is required to serve on to the assessee a notice u/s 143(2) within 6 months from the end of the financial year in which ITR is furnished. In this case no notice was ever served on to the assessee within 6 months even by 30.09.2019. It is noted that assessee company had shifted its registered office from Unit No.651-655, Sixth Floor JMD Megapolis, Sohna Road, Sector-48, Gurgaon-122018 to 7th ....