TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1969 (5) TMI 19
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said Act on the basis of returns filed by the assessee. The Wealth-tax Officer thereupon took proceedings under section 17(b) of the Wealth-tax Act on the ground that a part of the assessee's wealth had escaped assessment. Notices under section 17(b) of the Act were served on one, T.P. Pal, on 15th November, 1960, for the assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1959-60 and on 30th November, 1960, for the assessment year 1960-61. It appears that Shri T.P. Pal had signed order sheet stating that he had received notices under section 17(b) of the Act. The assessee filed returns puirsuant to notices for three assessment years on 30th November, 1960, and for the assessment year 1960-61 on 30th January, 1961. No point was taken at the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal before the Appellate Tribunal and contended that Sri Pal had no authority to accept service of notices. The Tribunal held that Sri Pal was empowered only to represent the assessee in the wealth-tax matters and was not granted authority to accept service of any notices on behalf of the assessee. The Tribunal was of opinion that there has been no proper service on the assessee of the said notice under section 17(b) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the service of a notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the validity of a reassessment made under section 17(b) of the Act; and as valid notices have not been served according to the Tribunal, the proceedings taken by the Wealth-tax Officer in pursuance of invalid notices and con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, if the assessee admits that he had received the notice, the contention on behalf of such an assessee that the notice was improperly served must be rejected. In that case what happened was that a notice under section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was served on a temporary agent of an assessee, who was not an authorised agent for receipt of notices on behalf of the assessee. The assessee filed a return in pursuance of the notice and an order of reassessment was passed. In appeal against the order the assessee had contended that the notice of reassessment had been improperly served and so the order of reassessment was bad in law. It was held by the court that in view of the fact that a return had been filed by the assessee in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inoperative. Reliance was also placed on the decision in the case of Ramendra Nath Ghosh v. Commissioner of Income-tax. Section 41 of the Wealth-tax Act is in pari materia with section 63 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. These provisions require that notices under the said Acts may be served either by post or in the same manner as summonses under the Code of Civil Procedure are served. Under Order 5, rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, service should be made on the defendant in person, whenever practicable, unless he has an agent empowered to accept service, in which case service on such agent would be deemed to be sufficient. Before service of summons on a person other than the defendant is held to be sufficient under Order 5, ru....