##PAGE1##

आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण Ûयायपीठ “एक-सदèय” मामला रायपरु म(cid:581)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

(cid:302)ी पाथ (cid:91) सारथी चौधर(cid:547), Ûया(cid:467)यक सदèय के सम¢

BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.763/RPR/2025

(cid:467)नधा(cid:91)रण वष (cid:91) /Assessment Year : 2016-17

Ravi Raika

22/4, Nehru Nagar (West),

Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 020

PAN: ACJPA2125R

.......अपीलाथ(cid:568) / Appellant

बनाम / V/s.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,

Circle-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.)

……(cid:292)×यथ(cid:568) / Respondent

Assessee by : Shri Moolchand Jain, Advocate

Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

सुनवाई क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Hearing : 03.02.2026

घोषणा क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Pronouncement : 05.02.2026

2

Ravi Raika Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.)

ITA No.763/RPR/2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM

The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the

order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, dated 07.10.2025 for the assessment

year 2016-17 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing has assailed

both legal ground as well as grounds on merits. He further submitted that

if the said legal ground is answered in affirmative, then all other grounds

including grounds on merits shall become academic only.

3. In this case, reassessment was completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of

the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). The legal ground raised by

the Ld. Counsel for the assessee is that notice u/s. 148 of the Act of the

relevant assessment year dated 31.03.2021 was not signed digitally by the

competent authority which is therefore invalid notice in terms with

Section 282A(1) of the Act. The aforesaid ground is assailed as Ground

No.1 of grounds of appeal filed by the assessee.

4. In this context, it would be relevant to extract Section 282A of the

Act which reads as follows:

“282A. (1) Where this Act requires a notice or other

document to be issued by any income-tax authority, such

notice or other document shall be signed and issued in paper

3

Ravi Raika Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.)

ITA No.763/RPR/2025

form or communicated in electronic form by that authority in

accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed.

(2) Every notice or other document to be issued, served or

given for the purposes of this Act by any income-tax

authority, shall be deemed to be authenticated if the name

and office of a designated income-tax authority is printed,

stamped or otherwise written thereon.

(3) For the purposes of this section, a designated income-tax

authority shall mean any income-tax authority authorised by

the Board to issue, serve or give such notice or other

document after authentication in the manner as provided in

sub- section (2).”

5. I find that similar issue has been adjudicated and decided in favour

of the assessee in the case of Manoj Kumar Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1),

Bhilai (C.G.), ITA No.474/RPR/2025, A.Y.2013-14, dated 22.09.2025.

The relevant extract of the said decision are culled out as follows:

“……..In the same parameter on this legal contention raised

by the assessee in the case of Smt. Shobha Dubey Vs. ITO,

Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.), ITA No.395/RPR/2025 for

A.Y.2016-17, this Bench held that if the mandate of Section

282A(1) of the Act is not complied with by the department,

then in such case of violation, the entire proceedings carried

out subsequently by the department against the assessee is

vitiated and is held as arbitrary, bad in law. In other words,

any notice/communication that has been issued by the

department to the assessee shall have to be signed as

mandated by Section 282A(1) of the Act. If such signature is

missing or is left unsigned, in such case, all subsequent

proceedings that is carried out by the department on basis of

such communication/notice shall be void ab initio and non-

est as per law since there cannot be any legal sustainability

of any proceedings which are base