TMI Blog1992 (1) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing was provided in view of section 129 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" The basic backdrop against which the point arises is very short and it is this: A notice under section 139(2) of the Income-tax Act was served by the Income-tax Officer, Bombay, on the assessee. The assessee requested for time to file the return of the income. Time was granted up to November 30, 1972. The return was not filed within time. It was filed on March 16, 1974. Assessment was completed on February 11, 1975, by the Income-tax Officer, Bombay, who initiated proceedings under section 271(1)(a) and issued notice under section 274 for showing cause as to why penalty should not be levied for the delay. No reply was filed by the assessee. Under the orders of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the income-tax authority so succeeding may continue the proceeding from the stage at which the proceeding was left by his predecessor : Provided that the assessee concerned may demand that before the proceeding is so continued the previous proceeding or any part thereof be reopened or that before any order of assessment is passed against him, he be reheard." The principle underlying is that the succeeding officer has authority to continue the proceedings from the stage at which they are left by his predecessor and the assessee may demand that before the proceeding is so continued, the previous proceeding or any part thereof may be reopened or that he may be reheard before passing the assessment order. The use of the word "may" in the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Anantha Naganna Chetty v. CIT [1970] 78 ITR 743 (AP), and (ii) the case of CIT v. Smt. Chitra Mukherjee [1981] 127 ITR 252 (Cal). The former decision is under section 5(7C) of the old Income-tax Act (which is in pari materia with section 129) read with section 28(3) (which is in pari materia with section 274). The latter decision is under sections 271(1)(a), 274 and 275 of the Income-tax Act. The former case lays down that even though section 5(7C) does not in terms provide for any notice to the assessee by the succeeding officer informing him of his intention to continue the proceedings from the stage at which his predecessor had left it, it provides for such an intimation by necessary implication. The latter case lays down that even when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
