COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. AJMER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal emerges from the return of income filed by the respondent -assessee in respect of the assessment year 1994 -95 on March 12, 2003. During the course of deliberations at the hands of the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 148 of the Income -tax Act, 1961, on the issue of reassessment. Consequent thereupon, assessment under Section 143 of the Income -tax Act, 1961, came to be completed on September 29, 2003.

(2.) THE aforesaid assessment order dated September 29, 2003, was challenged unsuccessfully by the respondent -assessee before the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals). The appellate authority dismissed the appeal preferred by the respondent -assessee on February 16, 2004. The order passed by the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals) dated February 16, 2004, was then challenged by the respondent -assessee before the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income -tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the appeal and set aside the assessment order dated September 29, 2003.

(3.) IN order to challenge the determination rendered by the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal dated June 29, 2006, the Revenue has approached this Court by alleging that the following questions of law arise for determination: 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income -tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in concluding that omission of status on notice under Section 148 means that it had been issued in individual status, even when as per the provisions of Section 292B of the Income -tax Act, such omissions/mistakes cannot render the assessment, notice or other proceedings invalid? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, non -mentioning of status in notice under Section 148 would constitute a jurisdictional mistake, especially when all other facts and the escaped income were mentioned in respect of the assessee's Hindu undivided family?