9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1444X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uses the expression order of assessment and not merely assessment . Therefore, the assessment order becomes an order only when in fact it is communicated and therefore the communication of the order had to be prior to the end of the limitation period. No error has been committed by the ITAT in allowing the Assessee s appeal. - THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE R. K. PATTANAIK For the Appellant : Mr. R. S. Chimanka, Sr, Standing Counsel (IT) For the Respondent : Mr. S. Ray, Advocate Mr. Chitrasen Parida, Advocate ORDER Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. I.A. No.7 of 2019 1. There is a delay of 52 days in filing appeal petition. For the reasons stated therein, the delay is condoned. I.A. No.7 of 2019 is allowed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessment order dated 30th December 2016, was according to the Assessee, despatched by the Assessing Officer (AO) by post only on 7th January, 2017 and was received by the Assessee on 9th January 2017. Contending that in terms of Section 153-B of the Act the assessment order has to in fact be communicated to the Assessee on or before 31st December, 2016 and therefore, was time barred, the Assessee assailed the said order before the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)] apart from other grounds. However, the CIT (A) observed that the assessment order was dated 30th December, 2016 and there was no material to show that the AO had revisited the order thereafter. Accordingly, the CIT (A) upheld the order relying on the decision of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utta High Court in M/s. Binani Industries Ltd. (supra) which favoured the Revenue and not the decisions of Karnataka and Kerala High Courts which were against it. 7. As rightly noted by the ITAT the requirement under Section 153B (1) is for the AO to make the assessment order within a period of twenty-one months from the end of the financial year in which the last of the authorization for the search under Section 132 of the Act was executed. In the present case, there is no doubt that the last date by which the assessment had to be made was 31st December, 2016. As further rightly noticed Section 153B (1) uses the expression order of assessment and not merely assessment . Therefore, the assessment order becomes an order only when in fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessment order was passed on 31st March, 2005, the last date by which had to be made and the Authorised Representative (AR) of the Assessee visited the office of the Department and collected it on 13th April, 2005. When confronted the CIT produced records which did not contain the dispatch register . The Calcutta High Court then concluded that from the oral evidence of the CIT that the Department had not made any attempt to despatch the order for service on the assessee. It further observed there is no indication that the Assessing Officer revisited the order after 31.3.2005. The probability of the order being made and ready to be collected by the representative of the assessee as on 1.4.2005 cannot also be ruled out. 10. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
