9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f A.Y.1997-1998 as well as 1998-1999. The Tribunal found that proviso to Section 143(2) of the Act would apply only to a valid return and not to invalid return and hence, the A.O. was not required to issue notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and the assessment was to be made under Section 144 of the Act and, therefore, could be said as upheld. In our view, as the fact situations in the present case are the same, similar view, as was taken in [2015 (3) TMI 15 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] deserves to be taken in the present matter wherein held that where the Assessing Officer in repudiation of the return filed under section 158BC(a) proceeds to make an enquiry, he has necessarily to follow the provisions of section 142, sub-sections (2) and ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat question (A) has been added as per the order passed by this Court today in OJMCA No.1 of 2015. Under the circumstances, both the aforesaid questions may be required to be considered in the present appeal. 5. Learned counsel appearing for both the sides are on agreement on the point that in respect of very Assessee-appellant herein for the A.Y.1997-1998, on similar aforesaid two questions, Tax Appeal No.1385 of 2007 was admitted. As such, both the appeals had to be simultaneously heard, but, Tax Appeal No.1385 of 2007 is already decided vide order dated 05.12.2014. Learned counsel submits that question arise for consideration in the present appeal stands covered by the earlier decision of this Court dated 05.12.2014 in Tax Appeal No.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. 2.2 Being aggrieved by the order of the first appellate authority, the assessee preferred appeal before the ITAT and the ITAT confirmed the validity of the assessment framed by the revenue. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is filed. 3. Question no. A raised for consideration in the present Tax Appeal is now not res integra in view of the decision of this Court dated 10.03.2014 rendered in Tax Appeal No. 1357 of 2007 which involved identical issue. This Court in the said decision has held as under: 6. When challenged before the Tribunal, it also concurred with the view of CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the present appeals by the Revenue challenging these concurrent findings. The Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come, or has not computed excessive loss, or has not underpaid tax in any manner, he shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him either to attend his office, or to produce, or cause to be produced there, any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support of the return. Therefore, the language of the main provision requires Assessing Officer to prima facie arrive at satisfaction of existence of any one of the three conditions. Proviso under the said sub-section states : provided that no notice under this sub-section shall be served on the assessee after the expiry of twelve months from the end of the month in which the return is furnished A A . On a plain reading of the language in which the proviso is couched it is apparent th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and (3) of section 143 strictly for the purpose of block assessments. We do not agree with the submissions of the learned counsel for the revenue, since we do not see any reason to restrict the scope and meaning of the expression so far as may be apply. In our view, where the Assessing Officer in repudiation of the return filed under section 158BC(a) proceeds to make an enquiry, he has necessarily to follow the provisions of section 142, sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 143. 9. In the instant case, we notice that both CIT(Appeals) and the Tribunal have held that the procedure prescribed for issuance of notice under section 143(2) has not been followed at all. This realm of fact has not been disputed by the Revenue. In view of this dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essed income under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act at ₹ 14,96,750/-. In appeal, the C.I.T. (Appeals) maintained the assessment but on the point of interest, the appeal was partly allowed. The Tribunal passed the common order in respect of A.Y.1997-1998 as well as 1998-1999. The Tribunal found that proviso to Section 143(2) of the Act would apply only to a valid return and not to invalid return and hence, the A.O. was not required to issue notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and the assessment was to be made under Section 144 of the Act and, therefore, could be said as upheld. In our view, as the fact situations in the present case are the same, similar view, as was taken in Tax Appeal No.1385 of 2007 deserves to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
