Shri Puducheri Raghavan Venugopal vs. The Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The case involves four appeals I.T.A.Nos.141, 142, 143 & 147/COCH./2024, for assessment years 2016-2017, 2017-18, 2016-17 & 2016-17, against the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi's orders dated 30.10.2023. The CIT(A) had quashed the impugned assessment(s)/re-assessment(s) on the ground that the Assessing Officer had not followed the ratio of ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon [2010] 188 Taxman 113 (SC) i.e., for non-issuance of notice u/sec.143(2). The assessee had not filed her return in furtherance to sec.148 notice(s), which could be put to scrutiny u/sec.143(2) of the Act. The Tribunal restores the Revenue's instant identical four appeals back to the learned CIT(A) for afresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in quashing the impugned assessment(s)/re-assessment(s)?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Shridhar Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer, Ward -23(3), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘SMC’, New Delhi benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• ITA.Nos.61, 62 & 63/PUN/2022

  Pune bench

• Changanachery North Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Cochin bench

• Peroorkada Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer- 2(1)

  Cochin bench

• Rakesh Bhatt Vs ACIT

• DCIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs Sumati Garg

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2009-10Dismissed