Case Law Details
Mehta Emporium Jewellers Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Conclusion: Reassessment order passed by AO without issuing notice under section 143(2) was invalid as it is mandatory obligation of AO to serve notice by assigning reasons therein with regard to his belief of escaped tax liability before making reassessment of any escaped income.
Held: In the instant case, AO had passed reassessment order under section 148 without issuing notice under section 143(2) to assessee. It was held notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory and in the absence of such service, AO could not proceed to make an inquiry on the return filed in compliance with the notice issued under Section 148. In absence of any such notice, the entire procedure adopted by AO for escaped assessment, was invalid.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
1. This appeal and cross objection are filed by the assessee and Revenue respectfully against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-41 Mumbai dated 08.03.2016 for the Assessment Year 2011-12.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
