AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016-17, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1078563292(1), dated 16.07.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessment dated 20.12.2018 framed by learned DCIT, Sonepat itself. This is for the precise reason that the assessee/appellant appears to have filed its returns on 16.10.2016 declaring taxable income of Rs.19,02,050/-. The assessee’s Assessing Officer i.e. ITO, Ward-3, Sonepat thereafter issued section 143(2) notice to him on 04.07.2017 which followed the ACIT/DCIT, CIR, Sonepat yet another notice under the very provision on 28.09.2018. There is further no quarrel between the parties that all these culminated in latter’s impugned assessment getting framed in the assessee’s case on 20.12.2018.
We now advert to the assessee’s legal argument(s) for the purpose of challenging the impugned assessment. The Revenue could hardly dispute that going by the CBDT’s landmark Instruction No. 1/2011, dated 31.01.2011 the threshold pecuniary limit in “Mofussil” areas regarding non-corporate returns declaring income upto Rs.15 lakhs had to be assigned to the ITO’s, and those above the said amount had to go to the said ACs/DCs; respectively. The assessee’s case before us is that the above latter notice u/s 143(2) dated 28.09.2018 coming from ACIT/DCIT, Sonepat had not been issued within the statutory period of six months from the end of the relevant previous year. This clinching factual position has gone unrebutted from the Revenue side.
We conclude in this factual backdrop that the learned Assessing Officer’s impugned assessment is a non-est one in the eyes of law since he had not issued his valid section 143(2) notice dated 28.09.2018 within the prescribed period. Quashed accordingly.
All other remaining pleadings on merits between the parties stand rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.