2008 (2) TMI 33

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in concluding that the assessment order had not been passed on 26.3.2004 though the revenue had stated that the said assessment order had been dispatched to the assessee on 31.3.2004 ? ii)   Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has erred in law in setting aside the order of the assessment and Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who based upon the office record had recorded a finding that the assessment order had been dispatched by Regd. Post on 31.3.2004 ? 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return on 31.10.2001 declaring total income of Rs. 1,92,971/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) on 30.3.2002 at the returned inc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ime allowed. Although the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is dated 26.3.2004, yet it was served on the assessee by affixture only on 1.4.2004. It was also argued that no effort was made to serve the notice on the assessee through normal means before serving the notice by affixture. Thus, it was submitted that the service of the notice could be done by affixture only if service through normal means was not possible. It was also argued that in case the order was passed on 26.3.2004, why the same was not served by registered post on that date. It was also stated by the assessee that admittedly, a notice under Section 17(1) of the Wealth Act, 1957 dated 29.3.2004 for the Assessment Year 1997-98 issued by the same Assessing Offi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the presence of the Inspector of the department alone and not in the presence of an independent witness and thus taking into account these facts coupled with the non-production of assessment record before the Bench, the Tribunal held that the assessment order was time barred and therefore, the impugned assessment order for the year 2001-02 was quashed being passed after the statutory time limit. 5.   We find no force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the Revenue. The basic question to be decided in this case is "Whether the impugned assessment order was passed within the statutory period of limitation up to 31.3.2004 or not ? " The Tribunal after perusing the evidence on record and taking into account the ....