AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’) dated 22.10.2025, for AY 2013-14.
Shri Shailesh Kumar, appearing on behalf of the assessee assailed the assessment order on jurisdictional issue, as well as, on merits. The Id. AR submits that assessment for AY 2013-14 in the case of assessee has been reopened without service of notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on the assessee. The Id. AR of the assessee submits the assessee has been filing his return of income on the Delhi address. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice u/s.148 of the Act to the assessee at Yamuna Nagar address. The said notice was never served on the assessee. Hence, the re-assessment proceedings are without jurisdiction.
On merits of the addition, the ld. AR submits that the AO has only considered credit entries of the bank interest in the bank statement without even referring to the debit interest entries. He contended that addition cannot be made merely on the basis of credit entry in the bank account.
Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department submitted that in the return of income for the impugned assessment i.e. AY 2013-14, the assessee has admitted by mentioned Delhi address, but in the computation of income filed alongwith rate of interest, the assessee has mentioned Yamuna Nagar address. That means, the assessee is residing at both the places. On the basis of documents on record, the assessee cannot take the shelter of non-service of notice u/s.148 of the Act. On merits of the addition, the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision of AO and the CIT(A).
Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The assessee has raised a jurisdictional issue regarding non service of notice u/s.148 of the Act. Undisputedly, the AO has sent notice u/s. 148 of the Act to the assessee on the following address i.e. House No. 1282B/33B Adrash Nagar, Teh: Jagadhri, Yamuna Nagar. I find that the address on which the notice u/s.148 of the Act has been issued is the same address as mentioned in the computation of income filed by the assessee along with return of income for AY 2103-14. Though, in the return of income the assessee has mentioned his address at Delhi, the Yamuna Nagar address may not be primary address of the assessee, nevertheless, the said address cannot be unknown to the assessee as the assessee has himself mentioned the address in his computation of income. Therefore, to say that notice u/s. 148 of the Act sent to the Yamuna Nagar address of the assessee was never communicated to the assessee, may not be true. Therefore, the legal ground raised by the assessee stands dismissed being devoid of merit.
On merits of addition of Rs.27,20,513/-, the Id. AR has contended that the AO has only taken into consideration credit entries of interest without taking note of debit interest entries. Considering entire facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore this issue back to the file of AO for re-examination and decide the issue, in accordance with law. Hence, ground no. 2, 3 and 4 of appeal are allowed for statistical purpose.
In ground no. 1 of appeal, the assessee has assailed validity of assessment on the ground that the assessment has been made on the issues beyond the scope of reasons recorded for reopening. No submissions were made by the AR of assessee on ground no. 1 of appeal. Hence, no findings are given on ground no. 1.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.