9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Ld. CIT(A) on these issues - Decided against the Revenue. - I.T.A.No. 4878/Del/2011 - - - Dated:- 11-3-2015 - Shri H. S. Sidhu And Shri T. S. Kapoor,JJ. For the Petitioner : Sh. P. DAM. Kanunjna, Sr. DR For the Respondent : None Present ORDER Per H. S. Sidhu : JM The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 10/8/2011 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VIII, New Delhi for the asstt. year 2003-04 on the following grounds:- 1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and contrary to facts and law. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred holding that no notice u/s. 148 of the Act was served upon the assessee at any time be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 at pages 2 to 5 vide his Order dated 10.8.2011. For the sake of convenience, the relevant portion of the Ld. CIT(A) s order is reproduced as under:- 3.3 In the course of appellate proceedings, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant company has vehemently argued and submitted that the Ld. AO did not issue and effect service of any valid notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 within the prescribed period of 6 years from the end of the relevant AY i.e. 31.3.2010. It is therefore, argued that the proceedings initiated u/s. 147/148 are not sustainable in law. In order to submit the relevant facts, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant company has made the following written arguments:- In this regard the pertinent facts are that the appellant fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be appreciated that return of income filed includes returns submitted electronically prior to 26.03.2010 conveying that the data of the company in IT Deptt. database is updated with correct name address); 2. That assessee company has been regularly receiving notices and other communications prior to 26.03.2010 in terms of section 282 of IT Act, 1961 at address 8931/1, Multani Dhanda, Paharganj, Delhi (copy of notices received at address from Id. Aa are enclosed in paper book); Thus, in the facts and circumstances, it cannot be claimed that correct and updated address or proper name of appellant was not in knowledge of Id. AO on 31.03.2010 i.e. at the time of issue of notice u/s 147/148 for AY 2003-04. 3. That assessee company has n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in response to notice under section 148 did not advance case of revenue that notice under section 148 was actually served upon assessee - Rajesh Kumar Sharma 3111TR 235 (Del.) It may be appreciated that in this case even no notice u/s 143(2)/142(1) was served on assessee or director as such this is even at present case is at lower pedestal than case stated herein before. 7. That assessee has time and again requested Id. AD to provide the copy of various notices and communications mentioned in the assessment order and copy of assessee request letter dated 25.04.2011 is available in paper book but the copies are not provided and inspection of file is not permitted; 8. As regards, the claim of Id. AD that notices u/s 148 dated 26.03.2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment has also been communicated with It at the aforesaid address only for many years. In this situation, it is argued that there was no justification in sending the notice in question at E-18, Model Town- Ill, Delhi. It is also argued that all the notices addressed to the present place of business, namely, 8931/1 Multani Dhanda, Paharganj, New Delhi have always been served upon the appellant company by means of normal registered post and there has been no occasion for the department to effect service by affixture. Therefore, it is argued that either no notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 was issued for the AY under consideration or the same was not served upon the appellant company till the date of completion of assessment. In support of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 for the AY under consideration was served upon the appellant company at any time before completing the assessment. Accordingly, the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act, 1961 are held to be not sustainable. 5. As the proceedings u/s 147/148 itself have been held to be not sustainable in law, I do not consider it appropriate to decide the individual ground of the appeal concerning merits of additions made in the impugned assessment order. 6. After going through the aforesaid order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute, we are of the considered view that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed a well reasoned order by stating that the AO has not been able to substantiate the fact tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
