1976 (1) TMI 47

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the firm in March, 1970. It appears, however, that on21st Sept., 1970, along with the return the assessee filed an application in from No. 11. The ITO observed that since this was a case of change of constitution, the application should have been filed in form No. 11-A. He proceeded to state : "This fact was brought to the notice of the assessee on3rd Oct., 1973. The assessee had stated that he will be filing form No. 11 in duplicate (as original was not on record) and also from No. 11-A at the time of next hearing. The case was adjourned to20th Oct., 1973. None attended on this date and a fresh notice was issued on31st Oct., 1973for13th Nov., 1973. The assessee filed form No. 11-A on 13th Nov., 1973". The ITO was of opinion that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... merely issue a letter to the assessee but that there should be actually a formal notice and a formal opportunity given to the assessee to revise the defect. 5. On the other hand, Shri Kuldip Singh for the Department submitted that the provisions of s. 185(2) had been fulfilled in the present case. On3rd Oct., 1973, the defect in the application for registration had been brought to the notice of the assessee and the assessee's counsel themselves undertook to file an application in Form No. 11-A. They did not do it within the period of one month and, therefore, the technical formalities in the application for registration not having been complied with, the orders of the ITO and AAC should be confirmed. 6. I have considered the facts of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cally requires that where an application for registration is received, the ITO should apply his mind and decide whether it is in order or whether it is defective in any respect. He has to intimate the firm the specific defect found by him and give an opportunity to the assessee to rectify this defect. It is difficult to say that in the circumstances of this case this has been done. It is no doubt true that there appears to have been a general awareness on3rd Oct., 1973that there was some defect in the application for registration but what exactly this was and in what terms it was required to be rectified, were not specifically intimated by the ITO to the assessee. In this respect, the present case is somewhat similar to that considered by t....