Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 468 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTRevision u/s 264 - reasons for non appearance before the Assessing Officer - assessee pointed out that earlier notices were issued at her Malad address which she had changed nearly three years earlier to the knowledge of the Department - Commissioner, by the impugned order, heard Revision Petition only on the ground that the assessee was granted more than sufficient opportunities despite which she failed to appear before the Assessing Officer in response to several notices - HELD THAT:- Having perused the documents on record, in view of the confusion about services of earlier set of notices on the petitioner's correct address and the reasons cited by her in not being able to respond to the later notices which were duly served on her on account of her husband's ill health, we would request the Commissioner to examine her Revision Petition on merits. It is true that the petitioner not having participated before the Assessing Officer, necessary material in support of her contentions, could not be verified. Nevertheless, it would not be difficult for the Commissioner to do so while re-examining her Revision Petition. He could either call for a remand report and decide this issue himself or remand the proceedings before the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. The petitioner's representation that she had never purchased two properties as suggested by the Assessing Officer needs further examination. Her statement that she had sold one property and purchased another, both transactions being jointly done by her and her husband having equal shares, also requires further examination. The impugned order dated 12.3.2019 passed by the Commissioner is set aside. The Commissioner is requested to examine the Revision Petition on merits and disposed of the same in accordance with law.
|