P.D Dinakaran, J.:— The Revenue is the appellant in these appeals filed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench, dated September 16, 2003, made in I.T.A Nos. 609, 610 and 611.Mad/2003 and I.T.A Nos. 617, 618 and 619.Mad/2003.
2. The brief facts of the case, so far as they are relevant are as under:
The assessees filed returns of income and the same were processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act (for brevity “the Act”). The assessees derived income from property and share income from firms. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued notices under section 148 of the Act finding that the assessees claimed excessive deductions under section 24(1)(vi) of the Act while computing the income from property. The Assessing Officer disallowed the excess claim made by the assessees.
3. Aggrieved by the proceedings of the Assessing Officer, the assessees preferred further appeals before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.
4. As against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), further appeals were preferred by the assessees before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras “B” Bench.
5. The Tribunal, finding that the notices under section 143(2) of the Act were issued to the assessees beyond the period prescribed under the said provision, held that the assessment orders are vitiated and, therefore, set aside the same.
6. Against the said orders of the Tribunal, the Revenue has preferred these appeals on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Act and completion of assessment without issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act within 12 months is not valid?”
7. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vipan Khanna v. CIT, [2002] 255 ITR 220 held where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act had been served on the assessee within the stipulated period and the return as such had become final, in view of the amendment made in section 147 of the Act with effect from April 1, 1989, the Assessing Officer could not only assess or reassess the escaped income in respect of which proceedings under section 147 of the Act have been initiated, but also any other income chargeable to tax which may have escaped assessment and which comes to his knowledge subsequently, in the course of such proceedings.
8. In the instant case, admittedly, no notices under section 143(2) of the Act were served on the assessees within the stipulated period of twelve months and, therefore, the proceedings under section 143 of the Act come to an end and the matter becomes final. Hence, applying the ratio laid down by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vipan Khanna v. CIT, [2002] 255 ITR 220, we are of the view that no substantial question of law arises for our consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected T.C.M.P Nos. 445 to 447 of 2004 are also dismissed.