INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 148

Reassessment - service of notice - Assessee pleading non-service of notice under section 148 - Assessee was not residing on the last address available as per registered sale deed being the subect matter of dispue--No PAN obtained by assessee and given to AO

There was an AIR information which showed that assessee being a Non PAN case had purchased an immovable property for an amount of Rs. 54,79,710 situated at village Chandidass, Tehsil Dasuya for an amount of Rs. 54,79,710, during assessment year under consideration. This transaction was covered under Rule 114D read with section 139A(5) hence, information was mandatorily required to be sent to assessing authorities. This transaction involved of immovable property, wherein quoting PAN was mandatory. No PAN was quoted by assessee in the above transaction. The records revealed that no return of income for year under consideration was filed by assessee. Hence, source of investment in impugned investment could not be verified. Therefore, after recording reasons, notice under section 148 was duly issued and served by affixture on last known address as mentioned in the registered sale deed executed by assessee. In spite of sufficient opportunity of being heard allowed, no details were filed to explain source of investment in immovable property. Therefore, said investment was treated as unexplained investment and was added to total income in the assessment made under section 143(3)/147 read with section 144. Assessee challenged reopening on the ground of non-service of notice under section 148. Accordingly, to assessee service of notice was not as per section 282. Held: Assessee was required to obtain PAN and give her address which has not been done in this case. Therefore, AO was absolutely justified in sending notice under section 148 on the last address available as per registered sale deed. Since, assessee was not residing on the given addresses, therefore, question of refusal to accept the notice did not arise. Therefore, contention of assessee that service of notice was not as per section 282 is not tenable in law, there was a proper service of notice under section 148 by affixture and assessee was well aware of assessment proceedings going on in her case as evident from Letter, filed by assessee in connection with penalty show-cause notice under section 271(1)(b). Therefore, reopening of assessment could not be set aside.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Against the assessee.

A.Y. :

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 69

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT