Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 20275
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Yashwant Varma, Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, JJ
MIDWAY EXIM PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER – Respondent
ITA 214/2024
ADITYA KUMAR GARG
The absence of a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act invalidates proceedings under Section 147, constituting a serious legal error.
Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 143(2) and Section 147 - Appeal against ITAT's decision - The appellant contends that the absence of a notice under Section 143(2) invalidates the proceedings under Section 147 - The court admits the appeal for consideration of this legal question. (Paras 4, 5)
(B) Legal Error - The court notes the ITAT's failure to address the appellant's contention regarding the lack of notice under Section 143(2) in its decision. (Para 5)
Facts of the case:
The appellant-assessee challenges the ITAT's ruling, asserting that the absence of a notice under Section 143(2) during assessment proceedings renders the subsequent actions invalid.
Findings of Court:
The court acknowledges the need for consideration of the legal question raised regarding the notice under Section 143(2).
Issues: The primary issue is whether the ITAT erred in not deleting the addition due to the absence of a notice under Section 143(2).
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes the importance of issuing a notice under Section 143(2) for the validity of proceedings under Section 147, indicating that failure to do so may constitute a serious legal error.
Result: Appeal admitted for consideration.
% 15.04.2024 CM APPL. 22007/2024 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application is disposed of.
CM APPL. 22008/2024 (05 days delay in refiling)
1. Bearing in the mind the disclosures made, the delay of 05 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.
2. The application shall stand disposed of.
ITA 214/2024
3. Notice. Since the respondent is duly represented, no further steps need be taken.
4. We take note of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax And Another vs. Hotel Blue Moon [ (2010) 3 SCC 259 ]. It is in the aforesaid backdrop that the appellant-assessee assails the view taken by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [‘ITAT’] by contending that in the absence of a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘Act’]
- having been issued, the proceedings referable to Section 147 of the Act would fail. Matter requires consideration.
5. We accordingly admit the appeal on the following question of law:-
- A. Whether the ITAT made a serious error of law in not deleting the impugned addition, without considering the fact that in the present case the Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirming the same without overruling the appellant’s pointed contention that no notice under Section 143(2) of the Act during the pendency of assessment proceedings was ever issued or served upon the appellant?
