9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (7) TMI 191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly if the income did not exceed Rs. 15,000. No notice under s. 148 was to be issued by the ITO if the returns of income filed by the assessee pertained to the asst. yr. 1970-71 and subsequent assessment years, and no approval of the CIT was to be obtained before accepting such returns. If the income returned did not exceed Rs. 15,000 and the capital invested did not exceed Rs. 25,000, the assessments were ordinarily to be completed under s. 143(1). However, the returns of income filed in the names of minors and ladies were not to be accepted without proper enquiries. Accordingly, the assessees who had taxable income were requested and presumed to file their returns under the said scheme which were accepted by the ITO under s. 143(1). An ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue should not be modified, cancelled or set aside to set right the irregularities. 3. In response to the notice, none appeared. No request for adjournment was received. As none appeared, it is presumed that the assessee has nothing to say against setting aside of the assessments wrongly made by the ITO. The CIT, therefore, proceeded exparte against the assessee and held as follows (i) That there was no evidence on the record to prove the initial capital of the assessee and the existence of her business; (ii) that the assessee had declared the income in question in order to accommodate her husband who would have been assessed at a higher rate of tax. 6. Accordingly, the CIT by a consolidated order, set aside the assessments i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound that no reasonable opportunity of being heard, as contemplated under s. 263(1) of the IT Act, 1961, was given by the learned CIT to the assessee before passing the impugned order. We find from the original postal envelope produced by the representative of the assessee before us that the notice under s. 263(1) for 14th Jan., 1975 was actually served on this assessee on 21st Jan., 1975. Obviously, therefore, the impugned order dt. 15th Jan., 1975 was passed by the CIT before the service of the notice in question on the assessee. No other material has been brought to our notice by the learned representative of the Department to prove that this notice was, in fact, served upon the assessee before 15the Jan., 1975 by Registered Post or by a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
