TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce Rakesh Kumar Garg . Rakesh Kumar Garg,J 1. The Revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,1961 challenging order dated 18.5.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar in ITA No.462(ASR)/ 2004 by raising the following substantial questions of law:- i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in concluding that the assessment order had not been passed on 26.3.2004 though the revenue had stated that the said assessment order had been dispatched to the assessee on 31.3.2004 ? ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has erred in law in setting aside the order of the assessment and Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever properly served upon the assessee. However, the said appeal was dismissed by him vide his order dated 3.8.2004. 3. Aggrieved against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal raising the grievance that the assessment order for the Assessment Year 2001-02 had not been passed within the time allowed. Although the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is dated 26.3.2004, yet it was served on the assessee by affixture only on 1.4.2004. It was also argued that no effort was made to serve the notice on the assessee through normal means before serving the notice by affixture. Thus, it was submitted that the service of the notice could be done by affixture only if service through norma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r before 31.3.2004. It was also observed that despite repeated opportunities granted to the Revenue, no evidence was produced before the Bench to show that the assessment order was dispatched by registered post on 31.3.2004. The Tribunal also observed that it is surprising that even the service by affixture was made on 1.4.2004 in the presence of the Inspector of the department alone and not in the presence of an independent witness and thus taking into account these facts coupled with the non-production of assessment record before the Bench, the Tribunal held that the assessment order was time barred and therefore, the impugned assessment order for the year 2001-02 was quashed being passed after the statutory time limit. 5. We find no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
