9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (4) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary Disclosure of Income Wealth Ordinance, 1975 on 31st December, 1975 when the disclosure made by the assessee was accepted. 2. It was gathered on the basis of the argument of the Senior Deptl. Rep. that a notice u/s 17 dt. 25th Sept., 1975 for the asst. yrs. 1970-71 to 1974-75 was served upon the assessee on 27th Nov., 1975. A notice u/s 14(2) dt. 25th Sept., 1975 for the asst. yrs. 1975-76 was served upon the assessee on 4th Nov., 1975. The assessments for the asst. yrs. 1970-71 to 1975-76 were completed on 20th March, 1980. The assessee came in appeal for the asst. yrs. 1967-68 to 1969-70 for which the assessments were made in 1976 before the Appellate Commr. and the order was set aside by him on the ground that the assessee had ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings was started on 25th Sept., 1975 when the WTO signed the respective notices. He further referred to proviso (1) of s. 15(1) and urged that once the notices u/ss 14 and 17 were issued for the asst. yrs. 1970-71 to 1974-75 and for 1975-76 the declaration made by the assessee in view of s. 15(1)(a) of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Wealth Act, 1976 was not legal. Hence, the declaration made by the assessee was rightly not taken into consideration by the WTO when he completed the assessments. He further stated that even the assessments made for the asst. yrs. 1967-68 to 1969-70 were in order and, therefore, the AAC was not justified in cancelling the assessments. The assessee's counsel, on the other hand, contended that the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon the assessee on 27th Nov., 1975 and 4th Nov., 1975, the assessee was perfectly justified in making the declaration and, therefore, no further assessments could have been made even for the asst. yrs. 1970-71 to 1975-76. 5. Shri Chakrabarty, the Senior Deptl. Rep. replying to the argument of the assessee stated that the allegation of the assessee was not correct that the notice u/s 17 was subsequently issued or the notice was not served upon the assessee. He referred to the acknowledgement of the assessee in the record. He further stated that though the word "service" is in s. 15 but, however, the word "service" should be taken as the date of issue of the notice. The notice is dated on 25th Sept., 1975 and, therefore, even after readi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yr. 1975-76 was completed for which a notice u/s 14(2) dt. 14th Feb., 1975 was served on 4th Nov., 1975. Firstly, we examine the record of the department and it is correct that though a notice u/s 17 has been issued for the asst. yrs. 1970-71 to 1974-75 but on the order sheet nothing has been recorded nor the WTO has mentioned anything about s. 17 in his order for these years. The argument of the assessee is also correct that only a separate sheet had been maintained for these years on which the noting has been made about the issuance of the notice u/s 17 of the Act. The return of the assessee was already on the record on 27th Sept., 1975. The notice u/s 17 has only been served on 27th Nov., 1975. Once the returns were on the record, the n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
