9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3)/144 without serving notice u/s 143(2). 2. Addition of Rs. 3,33,30,600 representing cash deposited in the bank. 3. Addition of Rs. 27,43,716 under best judgment assessment by assuming a net profit rate of 8%. Summary: 1. Assumption of Jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3)/144 Without Serving Notice u/s 143(2): The first issue for consideration relates to assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3)/144 of the Act to pass the assessment order without serving any notice under section 143(2) of the Act. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the return of income filed on October 31, 2006 was processed under section 143(1) on December 5, 2006. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices under section 143(2)/ 142(1) of the Act were issued along with a questionnaire which was served upon the assessee properly. Since the assessee did not comply with the requirement of the notices the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment under section 144 of the Act. Before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) the assessee submitted that notice under section 143(2) was not served upon him and, therefore, assessment framed under section 144 was without jurisdiction. However, this contention of the assessee was rejected by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). He observed that as per the remand report of the Assessing Officer notice under section 143(2) was issued and sent through speed post at the correct address of the assessee and the evidence to this effect had been given in the shape of speed post booking list of the postal authorities. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has also noted that notice dated June 27, 2007 was sent through speed post to the assessee at his address E-10B, Jawahar Park, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. The second notice was issued on January 15, 2008. The assessee did not respond to the notice. The third notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on March 7, 2008 fixing the case for hearing on March 28, 2008 through speed post at the address of the assessee. The assessee once again failed to reply. The fourth notice under section 143(2) was issued on July 21, 2008 fixing the case for hearing on July 28, 2008. The assessee again failed to respond. Notice under section 143(1) of the Act was issued on October 6, 2008 and was served through personal service. This notice was also not complied with by the assessee. The Assessing Officer again issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act on November 7, 2008 fixing the case for hearing on November 12, 2008. Since there was no response from the assessee, the Assessing Officer provided final opportunity of being heard vide letter dated December 2, 2008. The assessee failed to reply this notice also and the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act. On the basis of the above facts, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) relying on the decision of the hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Madhsy Films P. Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 69 (Delhi) upheld the completion of assessment under section 144 of the Act. The assessee aggrieved by the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) filed appeal before the Tribunal challenging the assumption of jurisdiction under section 143(3)/144 of the Act. During the course of hearing the learned authorised representative for the assessee admitted that the assessee had no evidence to support his contention that the notice was not served on the assessee. The assessee has also not filed any affidavit to support his contention that notice was not received by him. On the other hand learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Departmental representative) supported the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). We have gone through the material on records carefully. From the facts stated above, it is evident that the Assessing Officer had provided almost six opportunities, but the assessee had not availed of the same. The notices under section 143(2)/142(1) have been sent through speed post and none of the notices have been received back. Therefore, in the absence of any contrary evidence brought on record by the assessee, it has to
|
