![sajan saini sajan saini](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/08/04/photo-0a6db47070deb5f15d4e4bcb76b222564535b7f4.jpg)
Subsequently, pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act, which was carried out on, the case of the appellant was centralised from Circle -1 Faridabad to Central Circle 25, New Delhi.Ħ. The said return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on.
![sajan saini sajan saini](https://rahulsainissss.files.wordpress.com/2019/03/img-5127.jpg)
Facts on record show that the original return of income u/s 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was filed on declaring income of Rs. The challenge is in respect of validity of notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act, which according to the assessee, is barred by limitation.ĥ.
![sajan saini sajan saini](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6PiyUjVxukI/maxresdefault.jpg)
#Sajan saini verification#
Accordingly, the additional plea raised for the first time is admitted, since it requires no verification of facts and the facts are very much in the body of the assessment order in the first page itself.Ĥ. But since the challenge to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer goes to the root of the matter, in light of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC 229 ITR 383, the same deserves to be admitted and adjudicated. Admittedly, this issue was never raised before the lower authorities. “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT-A erred in sustaining the order passed by Ld AO u/s 143(3) without appreciating that as stated in opening portion of impugned assessment order regular return u/s 139(1) of the Act was submitted on and notice u/s 143(2) is admittedly issued on as noted at second page of assessment order, which is manifestly time barred as last date for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) as reckoned for period under consideration (which is search year) from would be and so notice u/s 143(2) issued on is time barred and accordingly assessment framed u/s 143(3) and order of CIT-A may please be quashed.”ģ. counsel for the assessee challenged the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer by raising the following additional ground of appeal: BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, With this appeal, the assessee has challenged the correctness of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax -29, New Delhi dated pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17.Ģ. Revenue by : Shri Amitabh Kumar Sinha, CIT-DR IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH,īEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND