Taxmann Daily
Dear Reader,
Welcome to Taxmann.com | Newsletter – Reporting the Facts with Taxmann's Analysis. Today's Edition Brings You the Day's Most Pivotal Stories, Offering Clarity and Depth
Sequence of notices u/s 142(1) and 143(2) irrelevant if both served purpose of making valid assessment: HC
Hexa Steel and Power (P.) Ltd. vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre - [2025] 171 taxmann.com 539 (Orissa)
The assessee filed its return of income, which was picked up for scrutiny assessment. Notice under section 143(2) was issued. The assessee complied. Subsequently, another notice was issued, this time under section 142(1), purporting to make an inquiry. The assessee complied, but the inquiry could not have been resorted to following a notice issued under section 143(2) on its return filed.
Furthermore, in doing the assessment, section 144B was also resorted to. As such, by notification dated 17-2-2021, substituted sub-paragraph (1) in paragraph 5 of the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019, required furnishing a copy of the draft assessment before the assessment was finalised.
The assessee filed a writ petition contending that the draft assessment order, preparation of it mandated under section 144B, was not made available to the assessee. Secondly, after the issuance of notice under section 143(2), a notice could not have been issued under section 142(1).
The High Court of Orissa held that the assessment was made invoking the provision in section 143(3) read with section 144B on the assessee having complied with both notices, firstly issued under section 143(2) and then under section 142(1). The contention of revenue that the sequence does not matter inasmuch as the power to issue notice provided for in section 143(2) and section 142(1) is to make the assessment is to be accepted.
There was no dispute that the assessee's return was picked up for scrutiny assessment. The assessment had to be done. The commencement of the exercise of assessment was by issuing the section 143(2) notice. Then, further inquiry was felt necessary for the purpose of the assessment, and, therefore, the second notice was under section 142(1). Having complied with both notices, the assessee's allegation of not having had a full opportunity, particularly in view of statements made in the counter, was without basis.
No fault of revenue if notice wasn't served upon assessee due to non-updation of her address in PAN card: HC
The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice to the assessee under section 148A(b) and subsequently passed an order under section 148A(d). Consequent to such an order, he issued a notice under section 148.
In the writ petition, the assessee contended that the notices were not served to her either on the email ID or by post. Therefore, the proceedings were bad in law.
The Bombay High Court held that it was the duty of the assessee to inform the Income-tax Department about the change of her address and make necessary changes in the PAN card details. As the assessee failed to do so, no fault could be attributed to the AO on account of non-service of the notices.
However, considering that the assessee was an individual lady and her husband was on a transferable job, the AO was directed to serve subsequent notices on the address and e-mail ID given by the assessee.
That's it from us for today!
We're keen on enhancing Your Taxmann.com | Newsletter Experience and would greatly value your input. Your feedback is pivotal in guiding our improvements. Could you spare a few moments to share your thoughts in the comments on how we might better serve your needs?
??????????????.?????? | ????????????????—Where Technology Powers Your Legal Research Needs
Access the ?????????????? ???????????????? ???? ???????? ????????, ????????????-?????????????? ????????????????, and a ?????????????????????? ???????????? ???????????? to find exactly what you need, when you need it.
Experience State-of-the-Art Tax & Corporate Law Research! https://taxmann.social/dpSGE