Commissioner Of Income Tax v. And Connected Appeals Being Ita Nos.667, 669 And 670 Of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.541 of 2010 Date of decision: 4.4.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Joginder Kaur. -----Appellant. -----Respondent and connected appeals being ITA Nos.667, 669 and 670 of 2010 CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:-Mr. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counselfor the appellant. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocatefor the respondent. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This order will dispose of I.T.A. Nos.541, 667, 669and 670 of 2010 as all the four appeals involve same questions. I.T.A. No.541 of 2010 has been preferred by therevenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (forshort, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, New Delhi dated 19.1.2010 in ITA No.207/Del/2005 forthe block assessment from 30.6.1989 to 31.11.1997 claimingfollowing substantial questions of law:- “I.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in holding that thenotice issued u/s 158BD by the Assessing Officerwithout giving 15 clear days time to the assessee tofile the block return is ab initio void and invalid andaccordingly, the assessment order made by theAssessing Officer u/s 158BD in pursuance to the saidillegal notice is also illegal and invalid disregarding thefact that the assessee himself had filed the return on10-03-2003 in response to notice u/s 158BD dated09-03-2001 i.e. after a considerable gap of time andafter issue of various notices by the AssessingOfficer?case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in holding that thenotice issued u/s 158BD by the Assessing Officerwithout giving 15 clear days time to the assessee tofile the block return is ab initio void and invalid andaccordingly, the assessment order made by theAssessing Officer u/s 158BD in pursuance to the saidillegal notice is also illegal and invalid disregarding thefact that the assessee himself had filed the return on10-03-2003 in response to notice u/s 158BD dated09-03-2001 i.e. after a considerable gap of time andafter issue of various notices by the AssessingOfficer? II.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in declaring theproceedings pursuant to the notice as illegal andinvalid despite the specific saver provided under theAct by way of section 292B of the Income Tax Act,1961 without even considering and discussing thesaid section because in view of section 292B the Ld.ITAT should have set aside the case if certainprocedural at the time of service of notice remained tobe followed as the service of notice u/s 158BD was insubstance and effect in conformity with the intent andpurpose of the Act?” III. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in quashing theassessment order made u/s158BD of the Income TaxAct, 1961 and not deciding the issues involved in thecase on merit by holding that since the assessmenthas been quashed, the various grounds raised by therevenue in its appeal have become redundant at thisstage and hence do not call for any adjudication?” Learned counsel for the parties state that the matteris covered by judgment of this Court dated 1.2.2011 in I.T.A.No.558 of 2006 inCIT v. Sh. Sh. Naveen Verma. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed in same termsand the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision inaccordance with law. Parties may appear before the Tribunal for furtherproceedings on July 04, 2011. The appeals are disposed of. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of eachconnected case. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE April 04, 2011ashwani ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE