9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that there was hardly any explanation or justification for reopening the assessment of the HUF by issuing a notice to the individual - where law requires a thing to be done in a particular manner, it shall be done in that manner, or not at all - The requirement in this behalf is more rigorous in relation to the steps taken by the State and its authorities which have the effect of imposing additional financial liability on the citizens or exposing them to penal consequences - reopening of the assessment was only on the basis of change of opinion and it does not accord with the powers conferred u/s 147 of the Act – Decided against revenue. - I.T.T.A. No. 74 of 2003 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2014 - L. Narasimha Reddy And Challa K0odanda Ram,JJ. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner allowed the appeal through order, dated 03.09.1997. Feeling aggrieved by that order, the Revenue filed I.T.T.A.No.53/Hyd/1998 before the Hyderabad Bench B of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was dismissed through order, dated 04.09.2002. Hence, this further appeal under Section 260A of the Act. Heard Sri S.R.Ashok, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant and Sri A.V.Krishna Koundinya, learned counsel for the respondent. It has already been mentioned that apart from being an individual assessee, the respondent is the Kartha of the H.U.F., which is also assessed to tax. Though in the ordinary context, much difference cannot be discerned, the distinction assu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , and notice is served accordingly. The notice in the instant case was issued to the respondent, in his individual capacity. Even when the discrepancy was pointed out, the appellant proceeded on the assumption that once the respondent is before him, it does not matter whether the notice was issued to the H.U.F. or the individual. He proceeded to confirm the facts and figures mentioned in the notice and levied tax and interest. The Appellate Authority has gone through the entire record and found that serious error has crept into the proceedings. He pointed out the number with which H.U.F. on the one hand, and the individual on the other, are identified and held that the notice was issued to the individual, even while proposing to reopen t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
