Case Law Details
Vijay Corporation Vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)- Provisions of Sec. 143(3) of the Act contemplates that the AO shall pass an order of assessment in writing. The requirement of signature of the AO is therefore a legal requirement. The omission to sign the order of assessment cannot be explained by relying on the provisions of Sec.292B of the Act.
Tax computation is a ministerial act as observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kalyankumar Ray (supra) and can be done by the office of the AO if there are indications given in the order of assessment. But the notice of demand signed by the office of the AO without the existence of a duly signed order of assessment by the AO, in our view cannot be said to be a omission which was sought to be covered by the provisions of Sec.292B of the Act. If such a course is permitted to be followed than that would amount to delegation of powers conferred on the AO by the Act. Delegation of powers of the AO u/s. 143(3) of the Act is not the intent and purpose of the Act. An unsigned order of assessment cannot be said to be in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of the Act.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
ITA NO. 1511/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2005- 06)
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
I fail to understand as what prejudice was caused to assessee, when the demand notice etc., were duly signed. The Tribunal should have decided on the merit.