TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecided in their absence. The respondents did contend that the appellants did not produce certain documents. In the circumstances, it may well have been open to the appellants to proceed on the basis of Section 144 in view of provisions of Section 144(1)(b). Under Section 144(1)(b), the Assessing Officer is entitled to make a best judgment assessment if the assessee fails to comply with all the terms of a notice issued under Section 142(1). We will assume, therefore, that the Assessing Officer could have done so. However, despite the same, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) on the basis of the information provided by the assessee. No infirmity in the action taken by the Assessing Officer. - Decided against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s grounds of appeal raised? IV. Whether, the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the addition made of ₹ 53,32,424/- without granting fair, proper reasonable opportunity of being heard as without adhering to the principles of the natural justice? V. Whether, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the addition made u/s 68 of the Act based on the credits which are admittedly not in the regular books of accounts of the assessee? VI. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the addition made of ₹ 30,05,592/- u/s 68 of the Act by adopting the peak credit of the individual creditor as against the peak credit of the all the creditors together? VII. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tedly given opportunities. For instance, by a letter dated 23.09.1997, the appellants were informed that the photocopies of the documents could be collected by them from the office on any working day from 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m upto 30.10.1997. Even this letter could not be served through the process server. The Inspector of the Income Tax department was deputed to ascertain the whereabouts of the appellants. The appellants mostly remained in Sirsa (Haryana) and visited Delhi occasionally. Ultimately, the notice was sent through registered post to the appellants' Sirsa address and Delhi address. The appellants never collected the photocopies. A further letter dated 06.11.1997 was, therefore, sent to the appellants and the appellants wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
