Akhilesh Singhal Vs ITO (ITAT Dehradun)
Reassessment Quashed & Penalties Deleted – ITAT Dehradun Holds Notice u/s 148 Invalid for Wrong Email & Address
Assessee filed return declaring ₹22 lakh. AO reopened the case on 29.03.2021 u/s 147 & completed ex-parte assessment u/s 144 r.w.s 144B, adding ₹27.86 lakh as unexplained bank deposits u/s 69A. CIT(A) upheld the addition.
Before Tribunal, Assessee raised an additional legal ground that the notice u/s 148 was never served, as it was sent to an old postal address & wrong e-mail ID despite AO having the correct details from later ITRs. Relying on NTPC v. CIT (229 ITR 338 SC), Sinhgad Technical Education Society (397 ITR 344 SC), Suman Jeet Agarwal (Delhi HC) & Nitin Jain (Del ITAT), the Bench held that service of notice u/s 148 is mandatory, & non-service renders the entire reassessment void. AO’s own letter admitted notices were sent to the wrong address & wrong e-mail.
Accordingly, ITAT quashed the reassessment as void ab initio, holding that the order passed u/s 147 without valid service of notice u/s 148 is non est in law.
Consequently, penalties u/s 271(1)(b) (₹40,000 each for AY 2014-15 & 2015-16) for non-compliance of notices were also deleted, since the notices themselves were never validly served & compliance was impossible.
