TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (10) TMI 627
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y filed on 28/11/2011 before the A.O. 2. quashing the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act, also ignoring the fact that signature on the notice u/s. 143(2) dated 23/09/2010 are similar to the signature of the assessee even on grounds of appeal & even on verification of the appeal memo. 3. quashing the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act by accepting argument of signature being slightly different & may be forget, without referring the matter to any forensic expert, particularly considering that the signature in all the above three documents namely notice dated 23/09/2010, Power of Attorney filed on 28/11/2011 and grounds of appeal along with its verification are similar. 4. quashing the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act, despite the fact that the A.O. in the remand report has clearly objected about claim of assessee of notice not being served by furnishing office copy showing clearly the signature of the assessee. That the appellant craves to add, amend, alter, delete or modify any or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appearing on the notice dated 23/09/2010 was forged. In support of the above, assessee furnished an affidavit and also requested to consider the affidavit as evidence and to pass necessary orders for forensic verification of signature. The Assessing Officer stated that besides notice dated 23/09/2010, the following notices were issued and served on the assessee as under:- Issue date Date of service Date of hearing Served on Remarks 03/03/2011 04/03/2011 16/03/2011 Not identified None attended 06/06/2011 08/06/2011 15/06/2011 -do- -do- 12/07/2011 14/07/2011 26/07/2011 -do- -do- 27/09/2011 28/09/2011 05/10/2011 -do- -do- 07/10/2011 11/10/2011 18/10/2011 -do- Mobile 9414157071 -do- 18/11/2011 24/11/2011 25/11/2011 On the assessee Adjournment application filed. Issue date 7. The assessee vide his submissions dated 16/03/2013 stated as under:- "we are in receipt of uncertified copy of seven notices issued and served u/s. 143(2) for identification of verification of persons to whom service of notice were made, as requested by us in our earlier submissions. We have gone through the remand report....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er to this effect and pray herewith to kindly consider legal favour. As regards identification of person served third and fifth notice, we like to submit that the same were not served upon the appellant and recipient of the same can be identified by the assessing officer only. We as such pray your honor to get the same done from the Assessing Authority. As regards sixth and seventh notice, we have already made our submission that one notice was pre dated and appellant was not in a position to make response to the same. The last notice was received only a day before but duly responded by the appellant with a request for reasonable opportunity but not considered. We, therefore pray your honor to consider our submission made vide letter No.143B dated 07.08.2012 and letter No. 168B dated 20.09.2012 and quash the order allowing appeal in the interest of justice." 8. The learned CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee, quashed the assessment by observing that as per the provisions of section 143(2) of the Act, the Assessing Officer should have served statutory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act on or before 30/09/2010. He further observed that the si....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on 24/09/2010 fixing the date of hearing for 07/10/2010. On the contrary, Shri Bherulal in his affidavit stated that he was not in touch with the assessee and had also not received any notice after leaving the services on 12/11/2008. The contents of the affidavit were not controverted by the Assessing Officer. The notice under section 143(2) of the Act in this case was to be served on the assessee before 30/09/2010 whereas notice dated 07/10/2010 was received by the assessee first time on 11/10/2010 i.e. after the statutory time limit prescribed under section 143(2) of the Act for service of notice. On a similar issue, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT & another Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 has held as under:- "Section 158BC provides for enquiry and assessment. After the return is filed, clause (b) of section 158BC provides that the Assessing Officer shall proceed to determine the undisclosed income of the block period in the manner laid down in section 158BB and "the provisions of section 142, sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 143, section 144 and section145 shall, so far as may be, apply". This indicates that this clause enables the A....