| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 4435 (Hyd-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 147
Since notice under section 143(2) being pre-requisite, in absence of such notice, the entire proceedings would be invalid, therefore reassessment order passed was set aside because notice under section 143(2) was given beyond the prescribed period of six months from the end of the financial year, in which the return was furnished by the assessee.
|
Reassessment - Validity - Notice under section 143(2) issued beyond the prescribed period of six months -
Issue was as regards validity of reopening of assessment under section 147 when notice under section 143(2) was issued beyond the prescribed period. Held: Following decision of Supreme Court of India in case of CIT V. Laxman Das Khandelwal, notice under section 143(2) being prerequisite, in absence of such notice, the entire proceedings would be invalid. Therefore, provisions of section 143(2) and proviso thereunder would clearly apply to the case of assessee. Admittedly, notice under section 143(2) was given beyond the prescribed period of six months from the end of the financial year, in which the return was furnished by the assessee, accordingly assessment order was set aside.
Followed:CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal 2019 TaxPub(DT) 5081 (SC)
REFERRED : National Thermal Power Company Limited v. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC) : 1998 TaxPub(DT) 0342 (SC), and Sargam Cinema v. CIT (2010) 197 Taxman 203 (SC) : 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1530 (SC)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. :
IN THE ITAT, HYDERABAD BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|