9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n this appeal, the assessee has raised the following Grounds of appeal : "1(a). That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) grossly erred in not holding that the order u/s 16(3) r.w.s. 17 dated 31-10-2011 passed by the Ld. ACWT is invalid, bad in law and without any jurisdiction. 1(b). That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the impugned order without appreciating the fact that when notice u/s 17 initiating reassessment proceedings is invalid, all subsequent proceedings become null and void. 1(c). That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was not justified and grossly erred in holding that the nullity of notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice issued u/s. 17 of the Act on the ground that, on the date of issuance of such notice ACRL stood dissolved and was not in existence inasmuch as it stood amalgamated with ACL. The Assessing Officer rejected the aforesaid plea of the assessee by relying on the provisions of Sec. 42C of the Act and stating that no notice shall be deemed to be invalid merely by reason of any mistake, defect or omission therein if such return of wealth, assessment, notice, summons or other proceedings is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of the Act. The Assessing Officer thereafter finalized the assessment. 5. On this point, the CIT(A) also affirmed the stand of the Assessing Officer by pointing out that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner of Wealth Tax, 347 ITR 664 wherein the plea of the assessee was upheld. A copy of the judgement of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has been placed on record. 7. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative (in short „DR‟) appearing for the Revenue has not controverted the factual matrix brought out by the assessee but reiterated that the provisions of Sec. 42C of the Act protect any infirmity in issuance of notice u/s. 17 of the Act in the present case. The ld. DR also submitted that subsequent to the issuance of notice u/s. 17 of the Act in the name of ACRL, when the fact of its merger with ACL was brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer has taken corrective steps and the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be cured because it goes to the root of the jurisdiction to reopen the proceedings. The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court was considering a similar situation. In the case before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, notice u/s. 17 of the Act was served on a concern which was not existing and had amalgamated with another concern. Therein also, the amalgamated company had challenged the validity of the initiation proceedings which was sought to be defended by the Department on the strength of the provisions of Sec.42C of the Act. Similar stand is also being taken up before us. Notably, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court held that the provisions of Sec.42C of the Act cannot cure a defect of the instant nature where no notice at all has been iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
