1984 (3) TMI 94

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... make a fresh assessment in accordance with law. 2. It appears that the assessee's case had earlier been fixed on 29th Jan., 1980 and 23rd June, 1980 for hearing by the ITO. There was no compliance on either of case dates. The IT again issued a notice under s. 143 (2) of the IT Act, 1961, fixing the case on 21st Aug., 1980. The notice was duly serve don partner Shri Kilash Nath on 7th Aug., 198 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and was not admitted to any hospital. The AAC held that Shri Kailash Nath was not totally incapacitated so as to prevent him from communicating with the order partner of Advocate of the firm and that he was also in a position to seek adjournment by presenting a letter to the ITO. He, therefore, confirmed the view of the ITO that the assessee was not prevented by sufficient cause from complying wit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ilable to him and seek adjournment of the case. Besides, the earlier history of the case is also against the assessee. We are therefore, of the firm view that the assessee was not prevented by sufficient cause from complying with the notice issued under s. 143 (2) of the Act. The ITO was, therefore, correct in rejecting the application under s. 146. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X