I.T.A. Nos.738 to 740/Lkw/15 1 Assessment year:2010-2011 IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.738 to 740/Lkw/2015 Assessment year:2010-2011 Shri Zafar Khan, Vs. Income Tax Officer-2(1), C-4/8, Paper Mill Colony, Lucknow. Nishatganj, Lucknow. PAN:AHFPK4995E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri M. P. Mishra, Advocate Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate Assessee by Shri Amit Nigam, D. R. Date of hearing 18/10/2016 Date of pronouncement 19/10/2016 ORDER PER P. K. BANSAL, A.M. All these appeals have been filed by assessee against separate orders of CIT(A)-1, Lucknow all dated 31/08/2015 relating to assessment year 2010-2011. 2. appeal in I.T.A. No.740/Lkw/2015 is against sustenance of addition made in assessment order passed u/s 144 of Act therefore, we decided to dispose of this appeal first. In this appeal assessee has taken ground being ground No. 2 which goes to root of validity of assessment therefore, we decided to dispose of ground No. 2 which reads as under: I.T.A. Nos.738 to 740/Lkw/15 2 Assessment year:2010-2011 2. That learned CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in failing to appreciate that e-filed return of income was on record and impugned assessment order passed u/s 144/147 of I.T. Act is invalid, since no notice u/s 143(2) of I.T. Act was issued by Assessing Officer. 3. We have heard rival submissions, carefully considered same along with orders of tax authorities below. When we asked Learned D. R. to produce copy of assessment record so that it can be ascertained whether any notice u/s 143(2) of Act has been issued on assessee or not, Learned D. R. produced assessment record and was fair enough to concede that no notice u/s 143(2) has been issued to assessee. Since no notice u/s 143(2) has been issued to assessee but only notice u/s 142(1) has been issued therefore, illegality has crept into assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 144 read with section 147 of Act. issue involved is duly covered by decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in case of U.P. Hotels Ltd. in which Hon'ble High Court has clearly held that in case notice u/s 143(2) is not issued to assessee, assessment framed without issuing notice u/s 143(2) within permissible time will be nullity. While deciding issue in case of U.P. Hotels Ltd., Hon'ble High Court has relied on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT & Another vs. Hotel Blue Moon as reported in [2010] 321 ITR 362 (SC). Since in this case no notice u/s 143(2) has been issued or served on assessee therefore, we quash assessment. Thus, ground No. 2 is allowed. 4. In result, appeal of assessee stands allowed. 5. I.T.A. No.739 and 738 relate to levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Act(1)(c) and 271B of Act. Since we have already quashed assessment therefore, no question of levying penalty on assessee I.T.A. Nos.738 to 740/Lkw/15 3 Assessment year:2010-2011 either u/s 271(1)(c) of Act(1)(c) or u/s 271B will arise. order passed u/s 271(1)(c) of Act(1)(c) and 271B levying penalty on assessee shall stand invalid. We accordingly quash both orders and allow both appeal of assessee. 6. In result, all appeals of assessee stand allowed. Sd/. Sd/. ( ABY T. VARKEY ) ( P. K. BANSAL ) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated:10/10/2016 *Singh Copy of order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Asstt. Registrar Zafar Khan v. Income-tax officer-2(1), Lucknow