9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (6) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned. From the dated signatures appearing on the said postal acknowledgement receipts it was apparent that the notices of demand in question were received by some person at the address of the assessee firm at P-16, Kalkar Street, Calcutta-7 on 16th July, 1968. The appeals were filed on 3rd Dec., 1969 along with petitions alleging inter alia that no notice of demand in respect of the impugned assessments was ever received by the assessee, and that the assessee came to know of the impugned assessments for the first time on 17th Sept., 1969 when notices for payment of tax for the material periods were received by the assessee from the Certificate Officer, Alipore. It was contended before the appellate authority that the limitation in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of business of the assessee firm was shifted from its original address at P-16, Kalakar Street, Calcutta 7 to 20 Ballygunge Circular Road, Calcutta 19 in or about Jan., 1968, and that intimation to that effect was duly sent to the Income-tax and Sales-tax authorities in Feb., 1968, and that the notices of demand in respect of the impugned assessments could not, therefore, have been received by or on behalf of the assessee firm at its original address at P-16, Kalkar Street, Calcutta-7, on 16th July, 1968. The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner produces in this Tribunal a copy of the assessee's letter dated 19th Feb., 1968 addressed to the Commercial Tax Officer concerned stating the place of business of the firm had been shifted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wledgement receipts lying with the assessment records no doubt indicate that the notices of demand in question were, in fact, received by some person on 16th July, 1968 at P-16, Kalakar Street. It is submitted on behalf of the Revenue that these postal, acknowledgement receipts do raise a presumption of service notices of demand in question on the assessee on 16th July, 1968. It is pointed out on behalf of the Petitioner that though the postal acknowledgement receipts bear the signatures of some person, they do not bear any seal or rubber stamp of the assessee firm, and that the signature are not decipherable. Affidavits have been sworn by Shri S.K. Rungta, a partner of the assessee firm stating that the assessee firm having shifted to its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee came to know of the impugned assessments for the first time on 17th Sept., 1969. The limitation in respect of the appeals, therefore, started to run from 17th Sept., 1969. Certified copies of the impugned assessment orders were applied for on 10th Oct, 1969 and the same were ready for deliver on 28th Oct, 1969, 28th Oct, 1969 and 4th Nov., 1969 respectively. Computing the limitation from 17th Sept., 1969 and excluding the time spent in obtaining copies, the appeals were therefore, filed within the prescribed period of limitation of 60 days. The dismissal of the appeals on the ground of limitation cannot, therefore, be sustained. 7. I, accordingly, allow the revision and set aside the impugned orders of dismissal as passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
