Pooja Prabhakar vs. ITO, Non-Corp Ward -15(1), Chennai

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Pooja Prabhakar, filed her return of income for the A.Y. 2015-16 declaring a total income of Rs.7,97,860/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation was conducted on her husband, revealing various credits in the assessee’s bank account, necessitating a protective assessment. A notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021, digitally signed on 01.04.2021, was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The assessee filed her return of income on 24.11.2021 declaring the same income. The case was assigned to the Faceless Assessing Officer for completion of assessment. The AO proceeded to frame the assessment ex parte u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.5,23,96,300/-. Aggrieved by the reassessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), which was dismissed on the ground that the appeal was time-barred. The assessee then preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) should be condoned.
• 2. Whether the notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021, digitally signed and issued on 01.04.2021, is valid.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Mansoor Baitha Vs Income Tax Officer

  Delhi Bench ‘SMC’, New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Kalpana Tyagi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-43(1)

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2022-23Allowed

• Praveen Kumar Patwa HUF Vs ITO Ward-47 (2), Kolkata

  Kolkata benchAY 2015-2016Allowed

• DCIT, Central Circle, Delhi vs. Pooja Mittal

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2014-15Dismissed

• POOJA PRABHAKAR Vs. ITO NCW 15 (1) CHENNAI

• Neptune Fincot Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Circle-15(1)(2), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed