TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15th Nov., 1993. 2. I have heard the arguments and also perused the records. 3. Ground No. 1 disputes the learned Dy. CIT(A)'s impugned order not directing the AO to proceed under s. 141, instead of cancelling and annulling the order under appeal before him which was void ah initio. The learned authorised representative of assessee has contended that the summary assessment under s. 143(1)(a) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 143(3) was made on 12th March, 1993, which is under dispute hearin. He has contended that in the learned Dy. CIT(A)'s order dt. 13th/14th Oct., 1992, the learned Dy. CIT(A) has clearly held that the income declared in the return being below taxable limit in the eye of law there was no valid return. He has referred to para 2 on p. 3 of learned CIT(A)'s order and contended that learned CIT(A) has h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed order no proceedings under s. 144/148 have been taken against assessee as per the knowledge of the learned authorised representative of assessee. He has relied upon Maya Debi Bansal vs. CIT (1979) 9 CTR (Cal) 235 : (1979) 117 ITR 125 (Cal). 4. As against the above, the learned Departmental Representative of Revenue has contended that the learned Dy. CIT(A) had in his order dt. 14th Oct., 1992 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld therein that assessment completed under s. 143(3) on the basis of invalid return cannot be treated as best judgment assessment under s. 144, as if no return have been filed, and the assessment would be void ab initio. No contrary decision has been brought to my notice. As such considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view with the return of income filed by assessee, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
