9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of demand for the assessment year 1972-73 when the assessment order and the notice of demand were made in the name of a dead person? 2. Whether the learned Tribunal was right in law in not the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Amarchand N: Shroff [1963] 48 ITR (SC) 59 cited at the time of hearing? 3. Whether the learned Tribunal was right in not annulling the assessment order and the notice of demand on account of insertion of section 292B in the Income-tax Act, 1961? 4. Whether the learned Tribunal was right in law in not annulling the assessment order because of not bringing on record all the four legal representatives by the Income-tax Officer particularly when the Income-tax Officer was aware of there being four legal represent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he was dead on March 30, 1981. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the assessment could be reopened only within a period of 8 years in terms of section 149 of the Income-tax Act by serving a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The notice was sent to the deceased Jagannath Sharma on March 30.1981, whereas the notice on the legal representatives of the deceased was served certainly thereafter. 8. It is necessary to observe here that for the assessment years 1975-76, 1976- 77 and 1977- 78, the notice was served upon Ramakant Shama, son of the deceased, by the assessing authority and final assessment order was passed on March 28, 1981. The widow of the assessee Smt. Kesar Devi filed an appeal before the Assist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under sub-section (2) Of section 139; and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if the notice were a notice issued under that sub-section (2) The Income-tax Officer shall, before issuing any notice under this section, record his reasons for doing so." "149. Time limit for notice -(1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued- (a) In cases falling under clause (a) of section 147- (i) for the relevant assessment year, if eight years have elapsed from the end of that year, unless the case falls under sub-clause (ii); (ii) for the relevant assessment year, where, eight years, but not more than sixteen years ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Therefore, this position is admitted by learned counsel for the respondent that the notice, if any, issued to the legal representatives has been issued after the judgment of the Income-tax Tribunal. This factual position has not been rebutted. 11. Taking into consideration the relevant provision of law and the facts of the case, we find that the Assessing Officer has wrongly exercised the jurisdiction under sections 148 and 149 of the Income-tax Act in issuing the notice to the legal representatives, reopening the assessment after the expiry of limitation period. Accordingly, the orders of the appellate authority and the Tribunal are set aside and the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer on September 27,1972, holds water and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
