9911796707
TMI Blog1934 (4) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly business. In response to that notice Kisanlal, a member of the joint family, appeared on 19th December, 1930 and asked for further time in which to produce his accounts. It is not apparent from the order sheet exactly what happened but it has been conceded before us that the Income Tax Officer told him that an extension would be allowed and that the date for further hearing would be intimated to him. A notice, in the form used for notices under Section 23(2), was issued to the joint family and served on Asaram at the joint family shop. The date fixed was 8th January, 1931, and on that date no one appeared. The Income Tax Officer accordingly made an ex parte assessment under Section 23(4). On 28th February, 1931, the assessee applied unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igned by the principal. It is not suggested that Asaram was a recognized agent or had been appointed an agent to accept service by an instrument in writing, and the petitioner has therefore urged that there was no valid service on the assessee. The Commissioner of Income Tax has supported the finding of the Assistant Commissioner that it was incumbent on the assessee to find out for himself the date to which the case had been adjourned and that it was not necessary for the Income Tax Officer to inform him of that date. Ordinarily it may be the duty of the assessee who applies for an adjournment to find out the date fixed, but when the Income Tax Officer tells the assessee that an adjournment will be allowed and that the adjourned date will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; it is not clear whether the gomastha was a recognized agent or had been authorized in writing to accept service, and there is no discussion of this point. The Commissioner of Income Tax has stated that he does not believe the affidavits stating that the contents of the notice were not communicated by Asaram to Kisanlal; but even if these affidavits be disbelieved, a point which has not been considered by the Income Tax Officer and Assistant Commissioner, there is no evidence to show that the notice did in effect reach Kisanlal. We do not think it unreasonable to insist that Income Tax Officers, in doing the very important work of assessing income tax, must take the elementary precaution of seeing that the person with whom they are dealin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
