Rakesh Kumar v. ITO, Ward-56(1), New Delhi
[Citation -2016-LL-0920-40]

Citation 2016-LL-0920-40
Appellant Name Rakesh Kumar
Respondent Name ITO, Ward-56(1), New Delhi
Court ITAT-Delhi
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 20/09/2016
Assessment Year 2007-08
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags speaking order • validity of notice
Bot Summary: Ward-56(1), Vikas Bhawan, PAN-AGUPK0128P D Block, New Delhi Assessee by Sh. Pankaj Mohan Mittal, CA Revenue by Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement 20.09.2016 ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 13.05.2015 of CIT(A)-19, New Delhi pertaining to 2007-08 assessment year on various grounds raised by the assessee in the present appeal. Although various grounds have been raised by the assessee in the present appeal. Ld. AR inviting attention to Ground No.1 2 submitted that the order passed by the AO u/s 144 is bad in law on account of which the assessment is void ab-initio. Inviting attention to the impugned order it was his submission that the Ground No.3 before the CIT(A) specifically addressed this prayer. The specific ground is extracted hereunder:- On the facts and circumstances of the case Learned A.O has erred both in eye of law and on facts in issuing the various notices under the Income Tax Act on wrong address and thus framing an assessment u/s 144. The Jurisdictional issues agitated by an assessee cannot be dismissed as a general ground requiring no adjudication. In view thereof the issue is set aside back to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to specifically address the jurisdictional issue on facts first by way of a speaking order in accordance with law and then proceed to address the issue on merits if need be.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-II NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .No.-4540/Del/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08) Rakesh Kumar, Vs ITO, C-1/5, Dilshad Colony, Delhi-110095. Ward-56(1), Vikas Bhawan, PAN-AGUPK0128P D Block, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Sh. Pankaj Mohan Mittal, CA Revenue by Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement 20.09.2016 ORDER present appeal has been filed by assessee assailing correctness of order dated 13.05.2015 of CIT(A)-19, New Delhi pertaining to 2007-08 assessment year on various grounds raised by assessee in present appeal. 2. Although various grounds have been raised by assessee in present appeal. Ld. AR inviting attention to Ground No.1 & 2 submitted that order passed by AO u/s 144 is bad in law on account of which assessment is void ab-initio. In support of said arguments, following two grounds raised in present appeal are extracted hereunder:- 1. BECAUSE, appellant denies his liability to be assessed in terms of notice dated 21.07.2008 issued to him under section 143(2) of Act. 2. BECAUSE, there is no valid service of Notice not being in conformity with law in this regard, consequently assessment order dated 15.12.2009 (passed in pursuance thereof) is void ab-initio. 2.1. Inviting attention to impugned order it was his submission that Ground No.3 before CIT(A) specifically addressed this prayer. CIT(A) in order under I.T.A .No.-4540/Del/2015 challenge it was submitted though has set out facts however while adjudicating dismissed same in para 6 holding that ground is general in nature requiring no adjudication. Accordingly, it was his prayer that proceedings be quashed on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. Ld.Sr.DR requested that matter may be restored. record shows that assessee agitated before CIT(A) lack of notice. specific ground is extracted hereunder:- (iii) On facts and circumstances of case Learned A.O has erred both in eye of law and on facts in issuing various notices under Income Tax Act on wrong address and thus framing assessment u/s 144. 2.2. perusal of finding arrived at in para 6 page 4 shows that it was dismissed holding as under:- 6. Ground Nos.1,2,3,7 & 8 are general in nature and require no adjudication. 3. Accordingly after considering submissions of parties before Bench, I am of view that impugned order cannot be upheld. Jurisdictional issues agitated by assessee cannot be dismissed as general ground requiring no adjudication. It is foundational issue which first needs to be addressed by speaking order. In view thereof issue is set aside back to file of CIT(A) with direction to specifically address jurisdictional issue on facts first by way of speaking order in accordance with law and then proceed to address issue on merits if need be. 4. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. order is pronounced in open court on 20th September 2016. Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER Amit Kumar Page 2 of 3 I.T.A .No.-4540/Del/2015 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT NEW DELHI Page 3 of 3 Rakesh Kumar v. ITO, Ward-56(1), New Delhi
Report Error