9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (1) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner cannot be deemed to be an assessee in default. The petitioner, Smt. Shantidevi, is a partner in the firm, Hiralal Gulabchand Sethi, Ashok Nagar, District Guna. We are concerned with regard to the assessment year 1976-77 and the relevant accounting year ended on Diwali, 1975. The petitioner submitted a return of total income before respondent No. 1-Income-tax Officer, C-Ward, Sagar, showing a total assessable income of Rs. 14,358 which included a share income from the partnership firm, Hiralal Gulabchand, amounting to Rs. 17,692. In the statement attached to the return, a note was given that her two minor daughters, namely, Ku. Lalita and Meena, were admitted to the benefits of partnership in the firm, Anandilal Dhannalal Sethi. An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner. A recovery notice dated April 5, 1980 (annexure " G ") was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner filed a reply and submitted that since the objections filed by the petitioner to the assessment under section 143(1) have not been decided she cannot be treated as a defaulter nor is there a case of suppression of facts or escaped assessment or underassessment. The petitioner filed this petition challenging both the notices/orders (annexures " F " and " G "). Shri B. L. Nema, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that both the notices/orders (annexures " F " and " G ") are bad because section 147(a) of the Act can only be invoked on account of an omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... art of the tax demanded in pursuance of the assessment. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner is a defaulter. It was the duty of the Assessing Officer according to the provision to section 143 which was existing at the relevant time to have decided the matter within a reasonable time and that was not done and the matter remained pending for years and then thereafter in 1984, the respondents woke up to give a notice to the petitioner under section 147 of the Act. Section 147 of the Act which stood at the relevant time before it was amended on April 1, 1989, notices could have been issued under the aforesaid section if there was omission or failure on the part of the assessee to made a return under section 139 of the Act for the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
