Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Prakash Krishnavtar Bhardwaj Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition No. 9835 of 2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 09/01/2023
Related Assessment Year : 2015-16
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Prakash Krishnavtar Bhardwaj Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)

Bombay High Court held that notice without signature affixed on it, digitally or manually, is invalid and would not vest AO with any further jurisdiction to proceed to reassess the income of the petitioner.

Facts- The petitioner’s contention that he is a non-resident Indian, residing in Dubai, UAE and since his total income for the relevant financial year was below the maximum amount chargeable to tax, he was not required to file his ROI for the relevant A.Y. 2015­-16. It was further his case that he received a notice dated 21.03.2022 under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act from Respondent No.1 stating that he had information that the income chargeable to tax for the relevant assessment year had escaped assessment, within the meaning of section 147 of the Act and called upon the petitioner to show-cause why a notice u/s.148 of the Act should not be issued.

The petitioner filed his response to the said notice electronically on 28.03.2022, pursuant to which, Respondent No.1 addressed an order under clause (d) of section 148A of the Act on 02.04.2022. It is the petitioner’s case that this order was never received by him through e-mail; however, he has subsequently received a copy of this order on 16.04.2022 by speed post.

The petitioner contested that since the notice dated 02.04.2022 issued u/s.148 of the Act was unsigned and never sent to the petitioner, the same is invalid, bad-in-law and deserves to be quashed and set aside; that since the purported unsigned notice issued u/s.148 of the Act itself was never issued in the eyes of law and three years have been elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, in this case Assessment Year 2015-16, as prescribed u/s.149(1)(b) of the Act, the action is beyond limitation.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

One Comment

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031