TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 172
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... much that while as per the Intimation dated 09-07-2024 served case was assigned to the Assessment Unit for completion of assessment in faceless manner as prescribed u/s 144B of the Act whereas the assessment is actually seen done in a non-faceless manner by the ITO Ward 50(1), Delhi. 3. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. First Appellate Authority in the NFAC has erred in law in dismissing the appeal against the assessment order disregarding that it was unsustainable as its initiation u/s148(b) was on information/material showing the purchase value at 75 lacs whereas the purchase value was just at 25 lacs. 4. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case order passed u/s 250 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority in the NFAC, in dismissing the appeal is bad in law as it disregarded that very assessment made u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 dated 2903-2025 was bad in law for having been passed without disclosing as to why provisions of section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were invoked. 5. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority in the NFAC is unsustainable in law a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y in the NFAC erred in law in not holding that AO was not justified in not taking note of the fact that the very valuation declared in the sale/purchase document stands accepted in the hands of the Seller as a result of which in the hands of the Appellant too no action was required to be taken more so when no reopening was permissible on the 'deemed income' which could not have been the basis of issuing Notice u/s 148A(b)." 2. At the outset of the hearing, ld. AR for the assessee submitted that assessee has filed admission of the additional grounds of appeal and it is purely legal issue and the same are reproduced below :- "12. That, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law in not noticing that the initiation of the proceedings 148/148A was without the compliance of the laid down law in as much as the provisions of section L48A were not applicable in view of the information which stood notified u/s 135A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence assumption, of jurisdiction by the AO by seeking approval of the specified authority was bad in law. 13. That, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed obviously because by necessary implication Law mandates issuance of the Notices etc. at the correct address. Since, the Notice was issued/sent at the wrong address question of it having been served on the Appellant does not arise. 2.1.2 Fact that the Notices including the Notice u/s 148 were not getting served is also borne out of the information which the Appellant obtained under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Relevant documents to the above effect are narrated below; (i) Exhibit-1/1 to the instant submissions shows Notice u/s 142(1) dated 30-12-2024 addressed at CB-171 Ring Road, Naraina, Delhi wherein by hand another address 'CB-378 2nd Floor, Ring Road, Naraina, Delhi' is also mentioned disregarding that correct House No. was not CB-378 but was CB-278. This shows nothing but non- service of Notice. (ii) Exhibit-1/2 to the instant submissions shows service of assessment order dated 30-03-2025 by Affixture at CB-278, Naraina, New Delhi but strangely neither there are Panchas to this effect nor does it indicate at which specific conspicuous place of the premises this Affixture was done. Affixture does not even mention the floor in the building. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(b) or order u/s 148A(d)' of the Act. Qua the service by Affixture it is submitted that for the reasons mentioned above it is impossible to belief service by Affixture because there are no independent witnesses to this effect of having actually been done except Revenue's self-serving and maliciously self-created suspicious documents, as shown earlier. 2.1.4 For the purpose of completeness of the issue in hand it is considered necessary to mention that even on the E-mail also Notices had not been served. Information obtained under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Exhibit-1/5) being the Taxpayer Master Profile shows address of the Appellant to be CB-171, Ring Road, Naraina and E-mail mentioned is '[email protected]'. Exhibit-1/6shows the delivery status of the E-mail ( Show Cause Notice for proceedings u/s 148A of the I.T. Act ) addressed to [email protected] as 'Bounced'. This Exhibit also mentions that there was no other Email ID on the system. Probably because of erroneously writing 'i' as '1' or 'l' the mail got bounced. But it is clear that by E-mail also notices were not served. 3. Thus, non-service of jurisdictional Notice issued u/s 148 physic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue of notice u/s 148)- which read as under; "Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply in a case where,-- (a) a search is initiated..... (b) the Assessing Officer is satisfied,....that any money bullion....seized..u/s 132.. (c) the Assessing Officer is satisfied,....that any books of accounts ..seized.. (d) the Assessing Officer has received any information under the scheme notified under section 135A pertaining to income chargeable to tax escaping assessment for any assessment year in the case of the assessee." 2.2.2 In short, in view of the proviso the process as provided under clause (a) to (d) of section 148A is not applicable and the Assessing Officer is under an obligation to proceed with the issuance of notice u/s 148 straight away. It is an undisputed fact, as shown above, that the information which formed the ground for issuance of notice u/s 148A or 148 was received by the AO in pursuance of the scheme notified u/s 135A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and when it was so clearly action on the part of the AO to move proposal seeking Pr. CIT's approval for passing order u/s 148A(d) or action on the part of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pated in the assessment proceedings and filed submissions without raising any objection regarding the service of notices. He further submitted that accordingly, by virtue of the provisions of section 292BB of the Act, the assessee is precluded from challenging the validity of service of notice at this stage. Therefore, the objection raised by the assessee is devoid of merit and liable to be rejected. He further relied on the findings of the lower authorities. Ld. DR brought to our notice the report of the Notice Server and Inspector Ward 50(1), New Delhi which is reproduced below :- 8. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the case of the assessee was selected for reassessment on the basis of information received from the registrar of stamp duty that the assessee had registered a property residing at CB-278, 2nd floor, Ring Road, Naraina, New Delhi -28 but the AO tried to send the notice u/s 148 in the address CB-171, Ring Road, Naraina, New Delhi -028. Since, the notices were not served on the assessee, the above said notice was served by affixture. In this regard, Ld DR submitted the copy of the notice affixture, which was reproduced ....