9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 525X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the address for communication available with the income tax department as laid down in the rule 127 of the I.T. Rule, 1962. Since no one was on behalf of the assessee was available at the given address, therefore, notice was served by affixture according to the provision of sub-section (1) of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the light of the above facts and findings, we do not find any infirmity on this issue in the order of ld. CIT(A) that Assessing Officer has served the notice by affixture on the last known address of the assessee. Therefore, this ground of appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. Additions made by AO ex-parte u/s. 144 and time limit for issuing of notice u/s. 148 - HELD THAT:- As observed during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grounds of appeal:- The Learned A.O. erred in passing an order u/s, 144 r.w.s. 147 dated 18-12-2017 and learned C.I.T. (A) G.N.R. also erred in confirming the said order. Your appellant submits that on the facts of the case the assessment order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 dated 18-12-2017 is I arbitrary, unwarranted and bad in law and the same should be cancelled. The learned A.O. erred in reopening the assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 dated 31-03-2017. Your appellant submits that no notice u/s. 148 dated 31-03-2017 was served upon H.U.F. or its living members of H.U.F. Your appellant submits that in absence of proper service of notice u/s. 148 dated 31-03-2017, the reopening of assessment u/s. 148 and passing the order u/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UTI M.F. Therefore, assessment was reopened by issuing of notice u/s. 148 of the act on 31st March, 2017. The Assessing Officer stated that a number of notices were issued to the assessee to make compliance during the course of assessment proceedings, however, no response has been made by the assessee. Therefore, on the basis of material on record, the total income of the assessee was assessed at ₹ 6,03,140/- after making addition on account of unexplained investment of ₹ 5,15,800/- in UTI MF, unexplained cash deposit of ₹ 84,077/- found in the bank account along with interest of ₹ 327/- received by the assessee. 5. The assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the Assessing Officer. The assessee has not communicated any alternative address as provided in rule 127 of the I.T. Rule, 1962. Therefore, notice was served on the address for communication available with the income tax department as laid down in the rule 127 of the I.T. Rule, 1962. Since no one was on behalf of the assessee was available at the given address, therefore, notice was served by affixture according to the provision of sub-section (1) of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the light of the above facts and findings, we do not find any infirmity on this issue in the order of ld. CIT(A) that Assessing Officer has served the notice by affixture on the last known address of the assessee. Therefore, this ground of appeal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
