This legal analysis reviews the proceedings of ITA No. 1964/DEL/2022, where Sohanbir Singh of Gurgaon contested the reassessment notices issued by the Income Tax Officer, Gurgaon, for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The case highlights significant procedural questions about the reassessment jurisdiction under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The dispute began with a reassessment order issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) on 19.07.2022, which the appellant argued was flawed due to non-compliance with mandatory legal procedures prescribed under sections 147 to 151 and the absence of essential notices under sections 143(2), 142(1), and 148 of the Income Tax Act.
The counsel for the appellant, supported by judgments from the Supreme Court and High Courts, argued that the reassessment proceedings were invalid. Specific emphasis was placed on the failure to issue a notice under section 143(2), which was deemed a fundamental procedural requirement for a valid reassessment.
The tribunal, led by Judicial Member Chandra Mohan Garg, accepted the additional grounds raised by the appellant during the proceedings. It was determined that the absence of a notice under section 143(2) was a fatal flaw, rendering the reassessment order legally untenable. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the appeals related to these procedural issues, setting aside the reassessment order.
The decision in this case sets a crucial precedent on the importance of adhering to procedural norms during tax reassessment. It reaffirms the taxpayer’s right to a fair reassessment process and underscores the need for tax authorities to strictly follow legal provisions to uphold the validity of their actions.
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform