TMI Blog1985 (1) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Director of M/s Divakar Investment and Trading co. Pvt. Ld., Ludhiana. The ITO issued notice under s. 139(2) to the above assessee asking it to file the return of its total income. In connection with the above proceedings, summons under s. 131 of the Act was issued on 29th Oct., 1982 to Shri R.C. Oswal asking him to produce the following information on 30th Oct., 1982: (I) Name and designation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , he was asked to wait for half an hour so that the statement may be got typed and could be supplied to him. It is not mentioned in the order of the ITO as to whether Shri R.C. Oswal waited for half an hour but it has been mentioned that the statement was not signed till 11th Nov., 1982, the date when the order was passed by the ITO. Ultimately, the ITO for non-compliance of summons, imposed a fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r with whom the company was assessed at Bombay. He pointed out that this was not a document to be produced. Rather it was a statement to be made. It was, therefore, beyond the scope of the documents to be produced. For the other items at Nos. (ii) and (iii) above, he urged that the assessee had challenged the jurisdiction of the ITO and if she was not satisfied about the legal claim, an opportunit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the other hand, vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below and contended that the jurisdiction had rightly been assumed by the ITO and for non-compliance of the terms of the summons, the fine was rightly imposed. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. We are in complete agreement with the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. Firstly the ITO was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
