AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17 arises against the Addl./JC IT(A), Panchkula’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/ S/250/2025-26/1085245562(1) dated 28.01.2026, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the p arties at length. Case file perused.
Coming to the first and fore most legal issue of validity of the imp ugned assessment herein, it emerges during the course of he aring that the assessee had re turned income of Rs.30,89,000/- in original which followed her “revised” return reducing it to Rs.24,71,000/- in question. T here is fur ther no denial as per the facts emerging from the case r ecords that it was the learned ITO w ho had initiated scr utiny proceedings against her while issuing section 142(1) r.w.s 143(2) notices whereas going by CBDT’s landmark Instructions No. 1/2011 issued u/s 119 of the Act date d 31.01.2011, any such non-corporate re turn in a metro city declaring income of above Rs.20,00,000/- w ould be scrutinized by the AC/DC only .
Faced with this situation, I find merit in the assessee’s instant first and foremost legal ground/argument that the impugned assessment has no t been framed as per the CBDT’s foregoing circular binding on the learned departmental authorities. T he same stand quashed in very terms therefore.
All other remaining pleadings between the par ties stand rendered acade mic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed.