9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 569X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee. - D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 37 / 2009, D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 131 / 2009, D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 414 / 2009 - - - Dated:- 1-8-2017 - K. S. Jhaveri And Inderjeet Singh, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Anant Kasliwal For the Respondent : Ms. Parinitoo Jain JUDGMENT In these appeals common questions of law and facts are involved, hence, they are decided by this common judgment. 1. By way of these appeals, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeals preferred by the assessee confirming the order of AO. 2. This court while admitting the matter framed the following questions of law:- DBITA No. 37/2009 i) Whether the ITAT has e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the knowledge of the appellant. The appellant has admittedly attended the office of the AO, subsequently and within the financial year i.e. before 31.3.2000 and this was admitted to be in response to his knowledge that the notice was issued in his name. 4. However, CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal holding that after first round of litigation, the assessee has gone in appeal wherein it has been observed as under:- I have considered the argument of the appellant and perused the assessment order as well as the facts available on record. It is seen that this issue came up for consideration before the erstwhile CIT(A), Rajasthan-II. She has considered the issue and has observed as under:- 2.2 I have considered the facts of the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause the return filed at ₹ 12,200/- in assessment year 1990-91 and ₹ 19,980/- for assessment year 1991-92 was much lower than the determined share from the firm which is very much higher. It is not the case of the appellant that the AO is incorrect in stating that he was a partner in the firms as indicated in the assessment order. Accordingly therefore, computation of Income is justified and the same is confirmed. Besides the various facts mentioned by the erstwhile CIT(A), It is seen that the notice u/s 142(1) was issued on 13.03.2000, which was returnable on 21.03.2000. This notice was admittedly received by Shri Radheshyam Nagar. Admittedly, the appellant has attended in response to the notice u/s 142(1), though belate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Department to serve the assessee at his known address, and upon not finding him there the Department learnt of the address where he would be found. Merely because other notices sent to the assessee group were received by the employees of Kiran Cinema it did not automatically lead to the inference that the assessee s place of business was also Kiran Cinema. In any event, there could not be an inference that V was duly empowered by the assessee to receive notices on his behalf. In the very first notice dated March 28, 2008 the endorsement made by V Showed him describing himself as accountant, Kiran Cinema and nothing more. The assessee made a specific request to the Assistant Commissioner that a copy of notice under section 148 along wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l contentions of learned counsel for the parties, a reference is required to be made to the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 143 of the Act, which provides : 143. Assessment.--. . . . (2) Where a return has been made under Section 139, or in response to a notice under Sub-section (1) of Section 142, the Assessing Officer shall, if he considers it necessary or expedient to ensure that the assessee has not understated the income or has not computed excessive loss or has not underpaid the tax in any manner, serve on the assessee a notice requiring him, on a date to be specified therein, either to attend his office or to produce, or cause to be produced there, any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support of the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
