9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (1) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ul,Delhi. For the asst. yr. 1971-72 the assessee filed a return of income declaring the total income of Rs. 1,33,555. The assessment was completed on13th June, 1973on a total income of Rs. 1,33,730. Earlier a notice under s. 210 was issued on26th Aug., 1970demanding advance tax of Rs. 13,365. According to the ITO the notice was sent to the assessee by registered post on5th Sept., 1970. The assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and pay additional advance-tax. In that view of the matter, he confirmed the penalty order. 5. Before us, the assessee's learned counsel vehemently argued that no notice was served on the assessee under s. 210 and, therefore, there was no question of levying any penalty under s. 212 (3A). It was submitted that mere issue of the notice was not enough and the ITO should have proved the service o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice of notice under s. 210 on the assessee and the assessee has denied the receipt of any such notice merely because it was issued, does not mean that service was effected on the assessee. We have, therefore, to hold that no notice under s. 210 is proved to have been duly served on the assessee. If that be so, no penalty could be levied under s. 273(c) because the foundation for levying such a pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
