9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by this common order. 2. During the course of hearing the learned Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted that the cross-objections filed by the assessees, which are common in both the appeals should be heard first. Accordingly, the cross-objections filed by the assessees were heard. In the cross-objections filed by the assessees in both the cases it has been submitted that the notice of hearing was received by the assessees on 18th Jan., 2007 and the cross-objections were filed on 23rd April, 2007. The cross-objections should have been filed within the period of 30 days i.e ., upto 17th Feb., 2007. Thus these are time barred by more than two months. The assessee made a request for condonation of delay, which was allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has held that where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act had been served upon the assessee within the prescribed period, the assessment framed will be bad in law. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v . Rajesh Kumar Sharma [2008] 214 CTR (Delhi) 547. The learned Authorised: Representative of the assessee further placed reliance on various decisions of Tribunal wherein a consistent view has been taken that in case of block assessment non-issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act would make the assessment bad in law. He also submitted that Tribunal, Special Bench, Delhi in the case of Kuber Tobacco Products (P) Ltd. v . Dy. CIT in IT(SS)A No. 261/Delhi/2001 for block p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manages and controls the affairs of the company should be read with the relevant provisions of the Companies Act. She further submitted that it is to be seen whether the assessee was prevented to give an explanation to substantiate his cause for which even the matter can be determined if the assessee has submitted such an explanation before the learned CIT(A) i.e ., at the very stage after which grievance arose. In other words, technicalities cannot be reduced to thwart the Revenue. She further submitted that non-issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act would not make the assessment null and void, but it is only irregularity to be cured. She placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v . Jal Praka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hieve the ends of justice. They cannot be permitted to achieve the very opposite end. Procedural provisions are generally met for affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity to the person proceeded against. They are generally speaking conceived in his interest violation of any and every procedural provision cannot be said to automatically vitiate the enquiry held or order passed. Therefore, non-issuance/service of notice could not render the assessment invalid, but at the best it can be a case of irregularity, which can be removed. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Areva T D India Ltd. v . Asstt. CIT [2007] 294 ITR 233 (Mad). She, therefore, requested that the matter may be remanded back ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visions of sub- sections (2) and (3) of section 143 of the Act. Both the clauses ( i ) and ( ii ) of sub- section (2) of section 143 postulates the scrutiny to ensure the correctness of the return. Under Chapter XTV, the powers of assessment under sub- section (3) of section 143 in determining the total income or loss could be invoked only after service of notices as contemplated under clause ( i ) and clause ( ii ). In the case of block assessment under Chapter XTV-B, where the AO does not proceed to make an assessment and determine the tax payable on the basis of the return filed in response to a notice under section 158BC( a ), he has to follow the provisions of sub- section (2) of section 143. The requirement of a notice under sub- sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Hon'ble Gauhati High Court and where notice under section 143(2) of the Act have not been issued, the assessments have been quashed. In the case of CPR Capital Services Ltd. v . Dy. CIT in IT(SS)A No. 319/Delhi/2003, dt. 31st Jan., 2008 [reported at [2008] 115 TTJ (Delhi) 528 : [2008] 6 DTR (Delhi) 70 Ed .] following the decision of Tribunal, Delhi Benches, in the cases of Naresh Kumar Arora v . Asstt. CIT in IT(SS)A 46/Delhi/2005; Tulika Mishra v . Jt. CIT in IT(SS)A. No. 81/Delhi/2003; and Asstt. CIT v . R.P. Singh IT(SS)A No. 70/Delhi/2004 [reported at [2007] 111 TTJ (Delhi) 880 Ed .], quashed the assessment proceedings. Since the issue is squarely covered by the decisions of Tribunal, Delhi Benches, referred to above a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
