9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 1005X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, respectively. 2. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having diagnostics lab at Kollam and a branch at Kottarakkara. It provides medical diagnostics, including MRI Scan, CT Scan, Ultrasound Scan, X-ray and laboratory test services, in both the labs to the patients. The petitioner-assessee had filed return of its income in respect of the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 on 31.10.2007 and 30.11.2008, declaring total income of Rs. 2,09,670/- and Rs. 1,10,710/-, respectively. A survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("Act", for short) was conducted on 24.9.2009 in the premises of the petitioner. During the course of the survey, it was foun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n for the assessment year 2007- 08 was assessed at Rs.2,39,88,872/-, and after deduction of the expenses claimed in the Profit and Loss Account, the rest of the income was treated to be the escaped assessment. Assessments for both these assessment years were completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act, and thereafter notices for payment of the tax and penalty were issued, which have been challenged in these writ petitions. 4. The petitioner had filed appeals against these assessment orders before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. When these appeals were pending before the CIT(A), the petitioner had approached this Court by filing WP(C) Nos. 3788/2019 and 3867/2019. However, this Court permitted the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wn the appeals filed before the CIT(A) and approached this Court with these writ petitions. On this sole ground alone, these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. However, this Court obliges to deal with the other contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. The next submission advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not issued notice under Section 143(2) of the Act before proceeding to finalise the assessments under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act. The submission is that in the absence of valid notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, the subsequent proceedings and assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 are in nullity and, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd, therefore, under the provisions of Sections 292B and 292BB of the Act, neither the notice nor the assessment orders can be said to be in violation of the provisions of Section 143(2) or any other provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Once the petitioner had participated in the proceedings and never raised an objection for non-service of the notice of assessments, it cannot contend before this Court that the impugned assessment orders are in violation of the statutory prescription or bad in law, in any manner. 8. Learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue has also stated that the facts of these cases are distinguishable from the facts of the case in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), wherein notice was not served on the assessee. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner to withdraw the appeals filed before the CIT(A). I am of the view that withdrawal of the appeals by the petitioner filed before the CIT(A) against the assessment orders, was not because of the liberty granted by this Court, but on his own volition. The petitioner could have challenged the assessment orders on merits, but it wanted to advantage of some technical issues and, therefore, instead of contesting the assessment orders on merits, the petitioner approached this Court. Hence, I do not find that these writ petitions are maintainable. 12. Be that as it may, the next contention of the petitioner regarding non-service of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act is also liable to be rejected. In as much as the petitioner was issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orders are incorrect on the ground of non-mentioning of the provision of Section 142(3) in the notice. The assessment orders cannot be challenged on just technical ground, in view of the express provision of Sections 292B and 292BB of the Act. 14. In view of the above, I find no substance in these writ petitions, which are hereby dismissed. The appeals filed before the CIT(A), which were withdrawn by the petitioner to pursue these writ petitions, are directed to be restored. If the records of those appeals are not available before the CIT(A), the petitioner can file copies of the earlier appeals within a period of fifteen (15) days from today and pursue the appeals, in accordance with law. If the petitioner re-files appeals as directed abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
