Shri Perumallur Vankipuram Janardhanan v. The Income Tax Officer,Ward - 2, Thiruvallur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 31.03.2021 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAMandThe Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Tax Case Appeal No.190 of 2021 Shri Perumallur Vankipuram Janardhanan ...Appellant/Appellant Vs The Income Tax Officer,Ward - 2, Thiruvallur....Respondent/Respondent PRAYER: Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961against the order dated 31.01.2020 made in ITA.No.144/Chny/2020for the assessment year 2011-12 on the file of the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench against the order of theCommissioner of Income–Tax(Appeals)-7, No 121, Mahatma GandhiRoad, Chennai–34 dated 27.06.2019 in ITA.No.78/CIT(A)–7/2018-19and arising out of the Assessment Order of the Income TaxOfficer, Ward-2, Tiruvallur dated 17-12-2018 in PAN-AQGPJ7092Mfor the Assessment year 2011-12. For Appellant:Mr.N.V.Balaji For Respondent :Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, SSC JUDGMENT(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for brevity) is directed againstthe order dated 31.01.2020 made in ITA.No.144/Chny/2020 for theassessment year 2011-12 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'D' Bench ('the Tribunal' for brevity). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The appeal was admitted on 15.03.2021 on the followingsubstantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the notice issuedunder Section 148 of the Act was withjurisdiction? 2. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the re-assessmentproceedings and the order complies with themandatory condition laid down under Section147?" 3. We have elaborately heard Mr.N.V.Balaji, learned counselfor the appellant-assessee and Mr.R.Karthik Ranganathan, learnedSenior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Revenue. 4. After hearing the learned counsel on either side for aconsiderable length of time, we find that the arguments made onbehalf of the appellant/assessee does not stem out on thefinding rendered by the Tribunal in the impugned order, but,attempt appears to be to question the correctness of theassessment order and the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officerat New Delhi to issue a notice under Section 148 of the Act. Itmay be true that the assessee had, while filing the appealbefore the Tribunal, raised a ground that the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) - 7, Chennai [CIT(A)] ought to have notedthat the notice under Section 148 was not served on theappellant and the consequential assessment is therefore illegaland requires to be set aside. 5. The Tribunal has taken a decision with regard to the pleaof lack of opportunity and violation of principles of naturaljustice and on this ground interfered with the order passed bythe CIT(A) as well as that of the Assessing Officer and remittedthe matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for a freshadjudication. 6. We have perused the order passed by the CIT(A), fromwhich, it is seen that the assessee did not seriously contestthe matter and it is in fact an ex-parte order. The ground,which were raised before the CIT(A), are only with regard to theviolation of principles of natural justice, as could be seenfrom paragraph 4 of the order passed by the CIT(A), dated27.06.2019. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant would strenuouslycontend that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act wasnever served on the appellant and failure to serve the same https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ within a reasonable period atleast before the completion ofassessment, would result in the assessment being void. Further,it is submitted that the assessment made by the AssessingOfficer is invalid, since it was made pursuant to a noticeissued by the Income Tax Officer at Delhi, who does not havejurisdiction over the assessee's case. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant would strenuouslycontend that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act wasnever served on the appellant and failure to serve the same https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ within a reasonable period atleast before the completion ofassessment, would result in the assessment being void. Further,it is submitted that the assessment made by the AssessingOfficer is invalid, since it was made pursuant to a noticeissued by the Income Tax Officer at Delhi, who does not havejurisdiction over the assessee's case. 8. In reply, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearingfor the respondent would submit that the assessee did notcooperate in the proceedings and several notices were issued andit is submitted that the assessee has been treated to be anaccommodative assessee and notice, dated 30.03.2018 was issuedto as many as 49 people and notice was sent to the assessee aswell. In this regard, the learned counsel has filed a typed setof papers containing certain documents. Further, the learnedcounsel has drawn our attention to the order passed by theIncome Tax Officer, Ward 49(1), New Delhi, dated 09.10.2018transferring the assessment records in the case of the assesseeto the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Tiruvallur. Further, thelearned counsel has also referred to the notice issued by theIncome Tax Officer, Ward-2, Tiruvallur, dated 30.10.2018 to theassessee under Section 148 of the Act. The learned counselrelied upon a report of the Inspector of Income Tax, Ward-2,Tiruvallur, who stated that he visited the last known address ofthe assessee to verify the address of the assessee and foundthat the address belonged to the assessee, but the house was letout and the tenants informed him that they have been receivingthe notices by the Department and forwarding them to theassessee and the tenants could not give the latest address ofthe assessee. Therefore, it is submitted that proceedings havebeen initiated in a proper manner. 9. In any event, the Tribunal has remanded the matter backto the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the matter afresh, since,right through, the assessee was contending that there was lackof opportunity and there was violation of principles of naturaljustice. 10. Thus, we are of the considered view that there is nogood ground made out by the assessee to interfere with the orderpassed by the Tribunal and there is no question of law, muchless substantial question of law arising for consideration inthis appeal. Accordingly, the appeal fails and it is dismissed.No costs. 11. After we have dictated the judgment, the learned counselfor the appellant submitted that the appellant should bepermitted to raise the question of jurisdiction before theAssessing Officer. 12. In our considered view, no such liberty is necessary,because it goes without saying that the assessee is entitled toplead all issues on facts as well as on law.Sd/- Assistant Registrar//True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarhvkTo1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai.2.The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Thiruvallur.3.The Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)-7, Room No.218, Main Building, IInd Flr, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 344.The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, No.2, J.N. Road, Near Janani Hospital, Tiruvallur – 602001.5.The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appelllate Tribunal, III Flr, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 90.+1cc to Mr.N.V.Balaji, Advocate, S.R.No.21541TCA.No.190 of 2021 GP2(CO)RN(03/05/2021)