The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), quashed assessment order on the ground that no effort has been made by Assessing Officer (AO) to send draft assessment order to correct address.
The short case of the assessee, DSV Solutions Pvt Ltd was that since the Assessing Officer did not forwardthe draft assessment order on or before that date and hence the assessment order is time-barred. There was a change of address in this case, and the assessee, intimated the new address to the Assessing Officer. As evident from the notice issued under section 142(1), the assessee even acted upon the said intimation, as the notice was sent at the new address.
It appears that the AO passed two draft assessment order,but both of these draft assessment orders contained the old address of the assessee, and, to this extent, the intimation regarding change of address was not given effect.
The first draft assessment order, containing two additions to the returned income, is said to have been served upon the assessee through the speed post. The second draft assessment order, containing three additions to the retuned income, is said to have been served upon the assessee, in its office.
None of these draft assessment orders was, according to the assessee, was forwarded by the Assessing Officer to the assessee within the permissible time limits. These orders were thus claimed to be time barred.
The justification for the use of an old address is thus devoid of legally sustainable merits. The lapse of the assessee, in the updation of PAN database, would not really validate the service of notice on the old address, as long as the requirements of the proviso to rule 127 of Income Tax Rules, 1962 are met by furnishing an address to the authority concerned a communication address. In any case, PAN database is just one of the options in rule 127(1) of Income Tax Rules, 1962.
A Bench consisting of Pramod Kumar, Vice President and, Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicial Member observed that “There was no forwarding, not even an effort to forward, the draft assessment order to the correct address, or at least the address furnished to the Assessing Officer under proviso to rule 127(2), within the permitted time frame under Section 153 r.w.s 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The impugned assessment fails for this short reason alone.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
