TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned AO has since erred in law and facts in usurping jurisdiction under s. 147/148 on the basis of a non-existing reason of non-filing of return by the appellant, because the return of income has already been filed under s. 139 itself, and was available on record, and this fact has also been brought to the notice of the learned CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) erred in not dealing and deciding the same legal ground and cancelling and annulling the impugned order on that ground alone. 1.2 The Hon'ble Tribunal very humbly is prayed to call for the record and may kindly decide this legal ground on the basis of the reason recorded by the learned AO." While dealing with the admissibility of this ground, it was thought that it would be prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 148 of the Act, is a 'non-existent' reason since the assessee as an individual had already filed his return of income for the year under consideration besides being sent to a wrong person. It was also explained that the firm has already stopped its business and the assessee had conveyed this fact to the AO vide letter dt. 2nd April, 2000 that this firm had discontinued its business on 30th March, 2000 and thereafter the books of account were kept only for the purpose of maintaining the assets and liabilities of the firm. It was also submitted that the assessee was an individual and proprietor of M/s Bhagirath Lal Ramesh Kumar, during relevant period. The learned Authorised Representative has challenged the very notice issued under s. 148 b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ril, 2000 as required under s. 176(3) of the Act. The notice was issued in the wrong name and it cannot be taken to be a valid notice. Secondly, the assessee, an individual, has already filed his return of income. A copy of return filed for 2001-02 by Shri Daini Baladia, as an individual, which was received in the IT office on 29th Oct., 2001 vide receipt No. 6147 is also on record. Therefore, notice dt. 31st Jan., 2002 issued on the reason that the assessee had not filed his return of income, is not a valid one. Hence, the notice in question issued under s. 148 of the Act is itself invalid. Moreover, no notice was issued to the assessee as individual and the impugned notice was issued in the name of the firm, which was no longer in existen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
