Ita/18/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Amritsar v. Gautam Aggarwal

ITA No. 18 of 2008 (O&M)-|- IN THE HIGH COURT QORKR PUNJAB AND HARYANA.AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 18 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.04.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar ....... Appellant )!*$+$ Sh. Gautam Aggarwal ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present:Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocatefor the appellant. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate withMr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent. RAJESH BINDAL,J. This appeal has been filed under Section 260 A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), against the order dated11.5.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AmritsarBench, Amritsar, in ITA No. 220(ASR/2006), for the assessmentyear 1998-99, raising the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal has erred in law in setting asidethe notice issued under section 148 of the IncomeTax Act merely on the ground that since the 'reasons'mentioned a wrong name though addressed in thecorrect name and address and correctly containingfacts and particulars concerning the assessee towhom the notice was intended to be issued and bynot considering the same to be a mistake and defect within the scope of section 292B of the Income TaxAct, 19612 (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal has erred in concluding that thereasons recorded did not pertain to the assessee,whose assessment was sought to be reopened thoughthe reasons recorded by the AO on 29.9.2003 werementioning the correct name and correct particularsand it was only the subsequent para which containedthe typographical mistake regarding the name of theassessee? (i11) Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the finding returned by the Tribunal is perverseas the Tribunal has proceeded on the assumption thatthe reasons recorded tor reopening the assessmentdid not pertain to the assessee though factually thereasons recorded for the reopening the assessmentwere not only containing the correct name andparticulars but also the reasons had been given to theassessee on 17.3.2005 prior to the completion of theassessment? (iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the ITAT has erred in concluding that thedefect/mistake in the reasons was not curable undersection 292B on the Income Tax Act? Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted that in view of circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 read with circularNo.279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, issued by CentralBoard of Direct Taxes, he does not wish to press the present appeal, asthe tax effect involved is less thanLy20 lacs. However, he prays thatliberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal in case something survives therein, ITA No. 18 of 2008 (O&M) Dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. It ishowever, Clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shallnot be taken as affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. The legalissue aS Claimed by the revenue is left open to be adjudicated in anappropriate case. (RAJESH BINDAL)JUDGE 11.04.2016TeeMa (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU)JUDGEH