2019 (11) TMI 1449 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 - notice u/s 148 was not served on the petitioner - statutory appellate remedy available to the petitioner - HELD THAT - Revenue produced the original Dispatch Register, wherein, it is shown that the petitioner was dispatched with a communication on 29.03.2018 through speed post. It is also seen that the Postal Department affixed seal on the said register, which, in the considered view of this Court, is enough proof for supporting the contention of the Revenue that the notice was sent to the petitioner on 29.03.2018. We not think that the petitioner is entitled to canvass the merits of the assessment order before this Court without challenging the same by filing regular appeal. Accordingly, without expressing any view on the merits of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the concerned authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011-2012 based on alleged non-service of notice under Section 148.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges an assessment order made under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011-2012. The petitioner contests the validity of the assessment on the grounds that the notice under Section 148 was not served. The Revenue argues that the notice was dispatched on 29.03.2018 via speed post from their office. The petitioner denies ever receiving such notice and claims it was booked from a different post office. The Revenue presents the original Dispatch Register as evidence, showing dispatch to the petitioner on the specified date through speed post. The Court finds the Postal Department's seal on the register as sufficient proof of dispatch. Consequently, the Court rules that the petitioner cannot challenge the assessment order without first filing a regular appeal. The petitioner is granted liberty to file an appeal within two weeks, and any such appeal will be considered on its merits without regard to the limitation period. No costs are awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.