Appeals Dismissed as Time-Barred; Refusal of Notices Accepted as Valid Service

The Tribunal dismissed all three appeals, affirming the AAC's decision that they were time-barred. The refusal to accept notices was considered valid service, and the appeals were filed beyond the statutory period, leading to their dismissal.

---

---

Issues:
Assessment years 1967-68 to 1969-70 - Appeals filed by assessee against common order of AAC dismissed as time-barred.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed by the assessee against the common order of the AAC, which held them as barred by limitation and dismissed them in limine. The ITO completed assessments for the years 1967-68 and 1968-69 on 22-2-1973 and for 1969-70 on 30-12-1972 under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The notices of demand and challan were sent by registered post AD, but were returned as 'refused to accept'. The notices were later served on the assessee through the Inspector on 16-10-1973. The assessee filed appeals against the ex parte orders on 12-11-1973 and 11-10-1973. The AAC, after multiple adjournments sought by the assessee, dismissed the appeals on grounds of limitation, as they were filed beyond the statutory period of 30 days from the date of service of notice of demand, without any petition for condonation of delay.

The assessee contended that there was no valid service of notices on the mentioned dates and that the refusal to accept notices did not occur. The assessee argued that due to ongoing disputes and health issues, he could not attend the hearings. The assessee also challenged the AAC's interpretation of refusal as valid service, citing legal precedents. The department representative supported the AAC's decision.

The crucial question was whether the appeals were filed within the statutory period. The AAC relied on the postal remarks 'refused' on the registered covers as proof of service, following legal precedents like Bhagwan Radha, Balbhadhar Mal, and Mangat Ram. The Tribunal upheld the AAC's decision, stating that refusal to accept registered AD letters constituted valid service, and the appeals were time-barred. The assessee's arguments regarding adverse circumstances and legal precedents from other High Courts were deemed insufficient to overturn the AAC's decision.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed all three appeals, affirming the AAC's decision that they were time-barred. The refusal to accept notices was considered valid service, and the appeals were filed beyond the statutory period, leading to their dismissal.

---