TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the notice dated March 18,1994, under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, issued to the petitioner for the assessment year 1990-91 (vide annexure 4 to the writ petition). In the alternative the petitioner has also challenged the order dated March 19,1994 (vide annexure 6 to the petition), by which the return filed under section 139(1) in compliance of notice under section 148 has not been accepted. It is prayed that the return under section 139(1) in compliance of notice under section 148 be accepted. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act having its head office at Varanasi. The petitioner established a vanaspati manufacturing unit which started production fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) vide annexure 2 to the petition. By order dated March 15,1994, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal and set aside the assessment order so that the assessment can be de novo (vide annexure 3 to the petition). Thereafter, on March 22,1994, the petitioner received a notice under section 148 of the Act dated March 18,1994, alleging that the income of the petitioner chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1990-91 had escaped assessment and asking to the petitioner to submit a return. True copy of the notice is annexure 4 to the writ petition. The petitioner filed a reply dated March 24,1994 (vide annexure 5 to the petition). In this letter he has stated that the return filed under section 139(1) should be taken to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the fate of the appeal as he received the copy of the order dated March 15,1994, only on March 30,1994. Be that as it may, there is no dispute that once the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) passed an order of remand on March 15,1994, the assessment proceedings became pending before the Assessing Officer. It is well settled that the notice under section 148 cannot be issued when assessment proceedings are pending vide CIT v. Ranchhoddas Karsondas [1959] 36 ITR 569 (SC); CIT v. S. Raman Chettiar [1965] 55 ITR 630 (SC); N. Naganatha Iyer v. CIT [1966] 60 ITR 647 (Mad); Ram Bilas Kedar Nath v. ITO [1963] 47 ITR 586 (All); Dr. Onkar Dutt Sharma v. CIT [1967] 65 ITR 359 (All); Sool Chand Ram Sewak v. CIT [1969] 73 ITR 466 (All); S.P. Koc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
