Petitioner never filed the return of income since she did not have any taxable income . The AO issued the notice u/s 148 which was returned with a remark “ Left” . Assessment was passed ex -parte. The AO started recovery proceedings . On getting the information telephonically about certain despatches by the Department she rushed from Jabalpur to Mumbai and gathered basic information . The assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment and consequential actions taken by the department . Allowing the petition the , Court held that mere issue of a s. 148 notice is not sufficient. Service is essential. If the postal authorities return the notice unserved, the Dept has to serve under Rule 127(2) using one of the four sources of address (such as PAN address, Bank address etc). The failure to do so renders the reassessment proceedings invalid . Followed Y. Narayan Chetty v .ITO ( 1959) 35 ITR 388 (SC) ( WP No. 513 of 2019, dt. 16.07.2019) (AY. 2011-12)
Harjeet Suraprakash Girotra v. UOI (2019) 266 Taxman 29/ 311 CTR 287/180 DTR 257(Bom)(HC), www.itatonline.org
S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice- Mere issue of a notice is not sufficient – service of notice is essential – If the postal authorities return the notice unserved, the Dept has to serve under Rule 127(2) using one of the four sources of address (such as PAN address, Bank address etc). The failure to do so renders the reassessment proceedings invalid.[ S. 127, 147, 149, 282 Rule, 127 ]