17. The Pr. CIT-6 vs. I-Ven Interactive Ltd [ Income tax Appeal no 94 of 2016, Dated: 27th June, 2018 (Bombay High Court)]. [ACIT-10(1) vs. I-Ven Interactive Ltd; dated 19/01/2015 ; ITA. No 1712/Mum/2011, AY: 2006-07 Mum. ITAT ] Section 143(2) : Assessment–Notice–Notice served on the old address- Assessment was held to be void [Section 292BB]

The assessee had filed its return of income for A.Y 2006-07 giving its new address therein. However, the A.O served the notice within the stipulated time u/s. 143(2) of the Act not on the address in the return but upon the address in the PAN record. The above notice sent by the Revenue within the prescribed time was not received by the assessee as it ceased to be the address of the assessee. Thereafter, admittedly beyond the time prescribed u/s. 143(2) of the Act, the notice was served upon the assessee.

During the Assessment proceedings, the assessee did raise objections as to the jurisdiction to assess the department u/s. 143(3) of the Act. However, the A.O did not accept it and passed an order u/s. 143(3) of the Act.

The justification of the Revenue is that, they served the notice dated 5^th October, 2007 at the address available in its PAN records. Therefore, the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act sent on the earlier address was correct. Besides, the assessee participated in the assessment proceedings and their action is protected by section 292BB of the Act.

Being aggrieved with the order of the A.O, the assessee filed the Appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) find that the impugned statutory notices issued without jurisdiction. The notice u/s. 143(2) was not served to the assessee and therefore, the proceedings u/s. 143(2) were bad in law. In view of the assessee raising such objections during assessment proceedings, the provisions of section 292BB were not applicable and section 292BB could not have given validity to the illegality / irregularity of the notices.

The CIT(A) held that the A.O completed assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act without assuming valid jurisdiction u/s. 143(2) of the Act. In the facts and circumstances, the assessment framed u/s. 143(3) of the Act was invalid.

Being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue filed the Appeal before the ITAT. ITAT upheld the CIT(A) order.

Being aggrieved with the order of the ITAT, the Revenue filed the Appeal before the High Court. The Court observed  that besides the return of income indicating the new address, the appellant had by earlier letter dated 6^th December, 2005 intimated the change of its address to the A.O and also requested a issue of fresh PAN. Besides, the A.O had infact served at the new address, the assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 30^th November, 2006 in respect of AY: 2004-05. This was much prior to the statutory notice issued on 5^th October, 2007 and 25^th July, 2008 at the address of the assessee as recorded in the PAN. The Assessee had taken up the objection with regard to non service of notice during the assessment proceedings. Thus, as rightly held by the impugned order of the Tribunal that, in view of the proviso to section 292(BB) of the Act, the notice not being served within time, cannot be deemed to be valid. Therefore, no fault can be found with the impugned order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, revenue Appeal was  dismissed.