2011 (6) TMI 958 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the assessment order passed u/s 144 of the Act.
2. Service of notice u/s 148 of the Act.
3. Adjudication of additions on merits.

Summary:

1. Validity of the assessment order passed u/s 144 of the Act:
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order canceling the assessment order passed u/s 144 of the Act. The CIT(A) had declared the assessment order invalid on the grounds that the notice u/s 148 was not served upon the assessee. The Tribunal examined the facts and found that the notice dated 28.03.2006 was sent by speed post to the address available in the assessee's bank account, which was not returned as unserved. The Tribunal held that the service of notice was deemed valid as per the Calcutta High Court's ruling in 28 ITR 684. Consequently, the Tribunal canceled the CIT(A)'s order and restored the assessment order.

2. Service of notice u/s 148 of the Act:
The Tribunal scrutinized the service of notice u/s 148 and found that the notice was sent to the address provided by the assessee to the bank. The Tribunal noted that the address was valid and the notice was not returned unserved. The Tribunal concluded that the service of notice was valid and the CIT(A) erred in holding otherwise. The Tribunal referenced the Calcutta High Court's decision, which states that service is deemed effected if the notice is properly addressed, prepared, and posted by registered post.

3. Adjudication of additions on merits:
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the additions on merits since the assessment order was canceled on procedural grounds. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to adjudicate the additions on merits after hearing both parties. The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal partly for statistical purposes and dismissed the assessee's cross-objection as infructuous.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the notice u/s 148 was validly served, canceled the CIT(A)'s order, and restored the assessment order. The CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate the additions on merits. The Revenue's appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the assessee's cross-objection was dismissed.