https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180975 A notice under Section 23(2) was invalid where the wrong year was stated and the printed alternative to produce evidence was struck out, because the assessee's statutory choice to attend or produce evidence could not be curtailed by the Department. In the facts, service of a valid Section 23(2) notice was imperative before the assessment process could properly proceed under Section 23(4), even though that requirement was not treated as an absolute condition in every case. The defective notice also supplied sufficient cause under Section 27 for non-compliance with the Section 22(4) notice, as the assessee had been denied the statutory opportunity to explain the return. en-us Tue, 04 May 1937 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Apr 2016 13:19:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180975 A notice under Section 23(2) was invalid where the wrong year was stated and the printed alternative to produce evidence was struck out, because the assessee's statutory choice to attend or produce evidence could not be curtailed by the Department. In the facts, service of a valid Section 23(2) notice was imperative before the assessment process could properly proceed under Section 23(4), even though that requirement was not treated as an absolute condition in every case. The defective notice also supplied sufficient cause under Section 27 for non-compliance with the Section 22(4) notice, as the assessee had been denied the statutory opportunity to explain the return. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 04 May 1937 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180975