TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (10) TMI 1186
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stant appeal on the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether after service of notice and keeping in view the fact that the assessee has participated in the proceedings voluntarily without making any objection, then at later stage, the appellate forum was not right to record a finding that the notice was not validly served, hence the proceedings vitiates ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in holding that no proper service of notice u/s 148 was made on assessee when the person receiving the notice u/s 148 is the same person who has received several other notices, service of none of which has been challenged by the assessee. 3. Whether ITAT was justified in law as well as in the circ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....006 (Appeal No.45 of 2005). Not being satisfied, the assessee has filed Second Appeal before the Tribunal who vide its impugned order dated 26.10.2007 has remanded the matter back to the A.O. to pass the assessment order denovo. The assessee has moved an application under section 254 of the Income Tax Act (MA 131/Luc/2008) before the Tribunal, where the order dated 26.10.2008 was recalled for the limited purpose i.e. validity of the service of notice under section 148 of the Act. Hence, by the impugned order dated 01.11.2010, the Tribunal has decided the validity of the notice issued under section 148 dated 25.02.2004 and finally observed that since there was no valid service of notice, so, the A.O. does not get the jurisdiction to make the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e principal place of the business of the assessee company. He further submits that the acknowledgment of Sri O. P. Nehru with regard to delivery of notice at the said place is sufficient as the notice was delivered at the proper place and it will be deemed that the service of notice on the assessee was complete, proper and lawful under the provisions of the Order 29 Rule 2 CPC and it is not open to the assessee company to challenge the validity of the service. He also submits that in the present case, the notice was delivered at the registered office of the assessee company and this fact has been acknowledged by Sri Nehru under his signature. Thus, service of notice was valid under Order 29 Rule 2 of CPC. It is also a submission of learned....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f service of notice, on 10.03.2004 Sri Dinesh Singh had no authority to receive such notice. On specific query from the Bench, he admits that Sri Dinesh Singh is a Chartered Accountant and representing the assessee company on earlier occasions. In support of his submission, he relied on the ratio laid down in the assessee's case Harsingar Gutkha Pvt. Ltd. vs. Cit; [2011] 336 ITR 90 (Alld.), where it was observed that : "The notice under section 143 (2) was served on the chartered accountant in the business premises of the assessee. The Tribunal should examine the material on record and give a basis for coming to the conclusion that the chartered accountant possessed requisite authority to receive the notice. The Tribunal had not considere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the assessee that the valid notice for reassessment is condition precedent as per the ratio laid down in the following cases: 1. CIT vs. Shital Prasad Kharag Prasad; (2006) 280 ITR 541 (All). 2. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow vs. Prem Kumar Rastogi; 124 ITR 381 Alld. Lastly, the learned counsel submits that no error has been committed by the Tribunal and the appeal filed by the revenue deserves to be dismissed. We have heard both the parties at length and gone through the material available on record. From the record, it appears that Sri O. P. Nehru has received the notice on 25.02.2004 at the assessee's premises and he was the legal officer of the assessee company and on earlier occasions, he has received the notic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., that the conduct of the petitioner was such that equitable relief under article 226 of the Constitution could not be granted to him." In the instant case, the assessee is a company whose employees/consultant are the Members of the family. Thus, service of notice is sufficient as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Kanti Devi Gupta; 274 ITR 526 (MP). The assessee has participated voluntarily and peacefully in the appellate proceedings. Participation is sufficient for the validity of the notice, as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT vs. Uttam Chandra Nahar; 295 ITR 403 Raj. In the case of K. G. Thomos vs. CIT ; 303 ITR 303 Kerla; it was observed that no notice under section 143 (2) was received but opportunity was....