9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (9) TMI 194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ITO imposed a penalty under s. 271(1)(c)(iii) of the IT Act, 1961 by the order dt. 13th March, 1978. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the said order on 25th Jan., 1980. According to the ITO, the notice of demand was served on 17th March, 1978. The assessee, therefore prayed for condonation of delay. The case of the assessee was that no service of the demand notice was effected on 17t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 273(A) and under s. 271(1)(c)(iii). It is said that both the orders and the demand notices were sent to the assessee and they had been received by Shri Kundan Mal Nahar. Against the order passed under s. 273(A), the assessee filed an appeal. The order pertaining to s. 273(A) having been received by the assessee and she having gone in appeal against that order the ITO informed the AAC by way of a r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the assessee has come up in appeal tot he Tribunal. It clearly appears from the finding of the AAC that no explicit authority is proved to have been given by the assessee to Shri Kundanma, Nahar to receive the notices on her behalf. The AAC relied on an implicit authority, as according to him. Shri Kundanmal Nahar received notices on behalf of the assessee in the past also. Shri Ranka, the ld. c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n by the assessee to Sh. Kundanmal Nahar for receiving notices on behalf of the former. Also, it was not proved that Sh. Kundanmal Nahar received the impugned notice and he duly passed on the same to the assessee, simply because Shri Kundanmal Nahar received some notices on behalf of the assessee in the past and he passed on the same to her, not inference could be drawn that he was an authorised a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was effected on the assessee. Similar view was taken by the Madras High Court in the case of Jayanthi Talkies Distributors (1978) 120 ITR 576 (Mad). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and following these authorities, we held that the assessee was validly served with the impugned notice. We, therefore, condone the delay and restore the case back to the file of the AAC with a direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
