9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 148 of the Act was issued, and (ii) If so, the date of its issuance. Therefore, all observations/findings with regard to service of the impugned order dated 6th September, 2016 are completely outside his mandate and are to be ignored. It would be open for the Assessing Officer while deciding on the reopening notice to independently consider the issue of service of the impugned notice dated 28th March, 2015. Needless to state the Assessing Officer will not be even remotely influenced by the observations as to deemed service of the notice in the impugned order dated 6th September, 2016. We must make it clear that window of four weeks was provided only to safeguard the petitioner in case the order of the Principal Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e time barred. This on the ground that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2008-09 had not yet been reopened by issue of any notice under Section 148 of the Act prior to 31st March, 2015. 3. At the hearing of Writ Petition No.1291 of 2016 a dispute arose between the parties about date of issue of notice. The Revenue contended that it was issued prior to 31st March, 2013. The Additional Solicitor General stated that the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act would require a factual determination. On instructions he stated that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -15 would investigate into rival claims and determine whether the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued or not and if so, the date of same. The counsel appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the directions of this Court i.e. taking evidence led by the parties on record and allowing cross examination of the deponent by the other side and granting personal hearing, It is not disputed before us that the above process has been followed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax leading to the order dated 6th September, 2016. This order dated 6th September, 2016 has held that the notice dated 28th March, 2015 was issued on 28th March, 2015 i.e. before expiry of the statutory period of limitation on 31st March, 2015. 5. The grievance of the petitioner before us is that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has besides deciding the dispute with regard to the date of issue of notice dated 28th March, 2015 also held that the n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of the appreciation of evidence. These are matters which could appropriately dealt with by the authorities under the Act. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has on the basis of the evidence led before him taken a view, which to our mind is a possible view with regard to issue which he was directed to decide, namely, issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act before expiry of period of limitation to reopen the assessment for the Assessment Year 2008-09. 8. Our order dated 13th July, 2016 in fact records that in case the Commissioner of Income Tax decides the issue in favour of the revenue, the notice may be restored to the Assessing Officer to proceed from that stage. When the aforesaid fact was pointed out by us to the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
