Nutaan Sarada Himghar Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata)
The assessee challenged the validity of the scrutiny assessment on the ground that the notice issued under section 143(2) by the NFAC was not in the format mandated by CBDT for computer-aided e-scrutiny. The notice merely stated that the return was selected for scrutiny but did not conform to the standardised e-proceeding format prescribed by CBDT Instruction F. No. 225/157/2017/ITA-II dated 23.06.2017.
Relying on several coordinate bench decisions, including Durga Automotives Pvt. Ltd., Sajal Biswas, Tapas Kumar Das and Shib Nath Ghosh, the Tribunal reiterated that CBDT circulars and instructions issued under section 119 are binding on the Income-tax authorities. Any notice issued in deviation from the prescribed format is invalid, and all consequential proceedings founded on such notice are void ab initio.
Since the impugned 143(2) notice in this case was admittedly not in the prescribed e-scrutiny format, the Tribunal held it to be an invalid notice. In the absence of a valid statutory notice under section 143(2) prior to completion of assessment under section 143(3), the entire assessment lacked jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the notice under section 143(2) was quashed and, as a direct consequence, the assessment order was also set aside and quashed in toto. The assessee’s appeal was allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT KOLKATA
