Revenue appealed against ITAT order confirming CIT(A) quashing of assessment due to non-service of Section 143(2) notice. High Court was left with no reason to interfere with finding that facts were not rebutted and dismissed appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.681 of 2010 =========================================================== I.T.O. Ward-1, Ara .... .... Appellant/s Versus M/S Parwati Devi, Club Rd. Ara (Bhojpur) .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. ARCHANA SINHA, Sr. SC, Income Tax Mr. Suman Kumar Mishra, Jr. SC, Income Tax =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA) Date: 17-04-2015 Heard learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. The appeal has been filed against the order dated 26.3.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in ITA No. 208/Pat./2009 relating to the assessment year 2006-07.
The short facts of the case are that a pre-assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 1, Ara under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act was challenged by the respondent-assessee before the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeals), Dhanbad, Camp Office, Patna in which the CIT(A) recorded the finding that there was no valid service of notice under Section 143(2) before the last date of initiating the proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act and the assessment order passed pursuant to such notice cannot be upheld and it was, accordingly, quashed.
Aggrieved by the same the Department filed its appeal before the ITAT, Patna Bench which after quoting the findings and observations of the
Patna High Court MA No.681 of 2010 dt.17-04-2015
2/2
CIT (A) held that the facts recorded by the CIT(Appeal) have not been rebutted by the Department and therefore, the order passed by the CIT(Appeal) was confirmed and the appeal filed by the Department was dismissed.
Before us, learned counsel for the appellant Revenue has sought to come back to the issue of service of notice. According to us, the findings given thereon by the CIT (Appeal) are pure findings of fact which were not even rebutted by the Department in appeal before the Tribunal which is the last Court of facts and has, accordingly, confirmed the order passed by the CIT (Appeal).
In the aforesaid view of the matter the legal consequences flowing from non-service of a valid notice under Section 143(2) would automatically follow and the only consequence would be that the assessment order passed pursuant to the same would have to be quashed.
We find no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)
S.Pandey/-
(Anjana Mishra, J)
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) is valid when the notice under Section 143(2) was not served in time.
Whether findings of fact regarding non-service of notice by CIT(A)) should be disturbed in revenue appeal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ara
M/S Parwati Devi
Ramesh Kumar Datta
Anjana Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
