TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferred by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 3 dated 30.06.2016 for Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The first ground of the appeal of the Revenue is against the action of the ld. CIT(A) in holding that the notice u/s 147 was issued beyond stipulated time limit. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company was granted certificate of registration on 13.08.2009 by Reserve Bank of India to carry out business of Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC). Accordingly, the assessee was engaged in providing financial transactions and was dealing in share and securities. The return of income was filed on 27.09.2008 declaring total income at ₹ 84,687/-. Thereafter, the return was processed u/s 143(1) [hereinafter referred to as the Act ]. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31.03.2015 calling for fresh return and proposing to reopen the assessment on the ground of escapement of income. According to the assessee company, it received the notice u/s 148 issued by the Assessing Officer dated 31.03.2015 only on 08.04.2015. Pursuant to the notice u/s 148 issued by the Assessing Officer dated 31.03.2015, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urse of assessment proceedings as well as the submissions filed by him before me in course of appellate proceedings. Since the AR has raised an issue of fact connected to legal issue and disputed the validity of issue of notice u/s 148 by contending that the same was barred by limitation, I shall first decide the issue of validity of service of notice u/s 148 challenged by the appellant vide its ground nO.1(b). I had called for the assessment records and I find that the notice u/s 148 is dated 31.03.2015. The Assessing Officer has issued notice u/s 148 dated 31.03.2015 which was served upon the appellant on 07.04.2015. The AR has contended that the notice u/s 148 was issued after 31.03.2015 and for this the AR has relied upon the records of the postal authorities. The AR has filed copies of tracking of website of India Post bearing No. RW6362627951N which evidence that the item was bagged by Kolkata RMS(CRC) on 05.04.15 in favour of CRC Delhi and then it was dispatched to the appellant in Delhi on 06.04.15. I find that the appellant has objected to this before the Assessing Officer also, but the Assessing Officer has summarily rejected the contentions of the appellant without any e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e wants us to reverse the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this count. On the other hand, the ld. AR vehemently opposing the said plea of the ld. DR, drew our attention to Page 23 of the Paper Book which has the tracking record of Indian Post. The consignment of the notice which issued by the Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Act has been numbered as RW 636262795IN which has been originated from Kolkata RMS(CRC) on 05.04.2015 and time recorded is 02:46:00 which was bagged to CRC Delhi on 06.04.2015 at 15:04:08 and on 15:48:09 the bag was dispatched to Sriniwaspuri Post Office and the assessee has received the same on 08.04.2015. From the aforesaid facts, we note that notice u/s 148 of the Act to the assessee company was taken over by the Post Office at Kolkata on 05.04.2015. The ld. DR could not bring any material on record like dispatch register or any relevant material to suggest that Assessing Officer after signing the notice on 31.03.2015, had handed over the same to Postal Authorities on 31.03.2015 itself, so as to counter the evidence furnished before us by the assessee. The ld. AR drew our attention to the Hon ble Gujarat High Court decision on a similar issue wherein the Hon ble G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the impugned notices have been issued within the time limit prescribed under section 149 of the Act. 14. In the background of the aforesaid facts and contentions, the core issue that arises for consideration is as to when can the notice under section 148 of the Act be said to have been issued. In this context it would be necessary to examine the true import of the expression shall be issued as employed in section 149 of the Act. 15. The expression issue has been defined in Black s Law Dictionary to mean To send forth; to emit; to promulgate; as, an officer issues orders, process issues from court. To put into circulation; as, the treasury issues notes. To send out, to send out officially; to deliver, for use, or authoritatively; to go forth as authoritative or binding. When used with reference to writs, process, and the like, the term is ordinarily construed as importing delivery to the proper person, or to the proper officer for service etc. [15.1] In P. Ramanathan Aiyer s Law Lexicon the word issue has been defined as follows: Issue. As a noun, the act of sending or causing to go forth; a moving out of any enclosed place; egress; the act of pass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me the envelopes are properly stamped with adequate value of postal stamps, it cannot be stated that the process of issue is complete. In the facts of the present case, the impugned notices having been sent for booking to the speed post centre only on 7-4-2010, the date of issue of the said notices would be 7- 4-2010 and not 31-3-2010, as contended on behalf of the revenue. In the circumstances, impugned notices under section 148 in relation to assessment year 2003-04, having been issued on 7-4-2010 which is clearly beyond the period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year, are clearly barred by limitation and as such, cannot be sustained. 6. We note that aforesaid dictum of law was laid down by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court after considering by the Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in R.K. Upadhyay Vs. Sanabhai P. Patel (supra) which the ld. DR relied upon in support of Revenue s contention. So, we note that even if the notice of the Assessing Officer has been dated 31.03.2015, since the same reached to the Postal Authorities only 05.04.2015, the date of issue can be taken as 05.04.2015 and not 31.03.2015 as contended by the Revenue. As per provision of Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
