Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (6) TMI 967 - GUJARAT HIGH COURTReopening of assessment - notice is challenged solely on the ground that the Assessing Officer had neither issued nor served such notice before the last date i.e. 31.03.2015 - Held that:- We find that the file of the department contains reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer carrying a signature of the date of 31.05.2015. The draft notice in proforma was placed before the higher authority for approval. He has granted his approval recording as under: “After perusal of record and in view of reasons given by AO in Annexure I, I am satisfied that income has escaped assessment. In this case and it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, necessary approval is accorded.” Below this, we find the signature of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Shri Sandip Kapoor carrying date of 31.03.2015. The question of issuance of notice, therefore, must rest. As noted, according to the department, the service was effected through two modes. Firstly, the service was delivered by personal delivery at the given address of the petitioner-company, where one Krishna Yadav was present and also received a notice putting his signature and giving his mobile phone number. However, to avoid any future complications, the Assessing Officer also directed the Tax Inspector to serve notice to the company in person upon which, the Tax Inspector visited the office of the assesee and found it closed, upon which, the service was made through affixing in presence of two panch witness. We find the original panchnama in the files of the department - Decided against assessee
|