https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252685 Reassessment proceedings were held unsustainable because notice was not validly served at the assessee's correct address and no notice under section 143(2) had been issued. Service by affixture at an address where the proprietary concern had already shifted and later closed was treated as defective, particularly when the correct address was available from bank records but not used. On these unrebutted facts, the reassessment could not be sustained and the assessment was quashed without examining the additions on merits. en-us Fri, 17 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Nov 2014 06:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252685 Reassessment proceedings were held unsustainable because notice was not validly served at the assessee's correct address and no notice under section 143(2) had been issued. Service by affixture at an address where the proprietary concern had already shifted and later closed was treated as defective, particularly when the correct address was available from bank records but not used. On these unrebutted facts, the reassessment could not be sustained and the assessment was quashed without examining the additions on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252685