TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favour of assessee. - Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.1183 and 1186 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2012 - Mrs. CHITRA VENKATARAMAN And Mr. K. RAVICHANDRABAABU JJ. For Appellant : Mr. T .Ravikumar For Respondents: Mr. M.P. Senthil Kumar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.) The above Tax Case (Appeals) arise out of the order of the Tribunal relating to assessment year 1994-95. Following are the questions of law raised for consideration in the above Tax Case (Appeals):- "(i) 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the re-assessment framed under section 143(3) r/w 147 for the assessment year 94-95 is invalid on the ground that no notice under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt to the notice under Section 148 of the Act. The Officer however replied on 29.1.1999 by stating that the reasons for reopening the assessment need not be communicated to the assessee as per the decision of the Apex Court reported in 63 ITR 219 S. NARAYANAPPA v. CIT, thus the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to comply with the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. The said letter from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax revealed receipt of the letter dated 11.1.1999 and the assessee was asked to comply with the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. Ignoring the contents of the assessee's letter dated 11.1.99, the Assessing Officer however viewed that since the assessee had not filed the return, after discussing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the assessee, even in the matter of finalisation of the assessment under Section 148 of the Act, compliance of the procedure laid down under sections 142 and 143(2) is mandatory vide order dated 17.7.2012 in T.C. (A).No. 159 of 2006 M/s. SAPTHAGIRI FINANCE INVESTMENTS V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), KANCHIPURAM. Referring to the Apex Court in the decision reported in 321 ITR 362 ASST. CIT v. HOTEL BLUE MOON holding that completion of the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) read with 147 without issue of notice under Section 143(2) was bad in law, this Court held that when there was failure on the part of the Revenue from complying with the procedure laid down under Section 143(2) of the Act, the assessment had to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
