9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 89X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) of the Act, it would not be proper for us to go into this aspect of the matter although the factum of issue of notices under section 142(1) of the Act, heavily relied upon by the Tribunal, may not be conclusive on the question of service of notice under section 139(2). - keeping in view the fact that by now a fresh assessment must have been framed, which information learned counsel for the Revenue was unable to obtain from the Department, despite sufficient time having been granted for the purpose, we should prefer the latter option - - - - - Dated:- 3-1-2006 - Judge(s) : D. K. JAIN., SURYAKANT. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by D.K. Jain C.J.- The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar (for short "the Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the assessee, on December 14, 1977, was ignored by the Income-tax Officer. The Income-tax Officer held that since the return had been filed after the expiry of more than two years from the end of the assessment year, it was an invalid return and no cognizance of such a return could be taken. Being aggrieved, the assessee took the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who agreed with the Income-tax Officer that the return filed on December 14, 1977, was not a valid return and no regular assessment could be made on the basis thereof. The assessee took the matter in further appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has held that notice under section 139(2) of the Act having been issued by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finding of the Tribunal that notice under section 139(2) of the Act had been issued and, therefore, it was deemed to have been served, has not been challenged by the Revenue and, thus, the return filed thereafter was rightly treated to have been filed pursuant thereto. It is urged that nothing turns on the statement of Bakshi Sampuran Singh, a director of the assessee-company, who, in his application under section 146(1) of the Act had merely stated that "as far as he remembers", no notice was served on him. We are of the opinion that in the absence of a specific challenge by the Revenue to the correctness of the finding of the Tribunal on the issue of service of notice under section 139(2) of the Act, it would not be proper for us to go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
