TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 569
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeals preferred by the assessee confirming the order of AO. 2. This court while admitting the matter framed the following questions of law:- DBITA No. 37/2009 "i) Whether the ITAT has erred in not having considered the issue of non-service of notice u/s 148 within the prescribed time frame despite this fact emerging from the assessment record? ii) Whether the ITAT was justified in law in having disallowed the claim for loss suffered by the Appellant-assessee in trading of Mustard undertaken through M/s Hari Agro Mills Private Ltd., Jamshedpur despite the same having been duly confirmed by the M/s Hari Agro Mills Private Lt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsidered the argument of the appellant and perused the assessment order as well as the facts available on record. It is seen that this issue came up for consideration before the erstwhile CIT(A), Rajasthan-II. She has considered the issue and has observed as under:- 2.2 I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made, and don't find the arguments given to be acceptable for the following reasons. The appellant has not filed any return of income for the relevant assessment year up to the finalization of the assessment by the AO. The AO has as per records, the information that the appellant was in receipt of substantial income above the taxable income being determined share of business income from firms in which the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Besides the various facts mentioned by the erstwhile CIT(A), It is seen that the notice u/s 142(1) was issued on 13.03.2000, which was returnable on 21.03.2000. This notice was admittedly received by Shri Radheshyam Nagar. Admittedly, the appellant has attended in response to the notice u/s 142(1), though belatedly before the AO and therefore, he has also filed return of income. These facts indicate that the appellant was in knowledge of the notice u/s 147/148, which was issued on 27.03.1998. In view of these facts and circumstances, the objection of the appellant in this regard is rejected and ground taken by the appellant failed." 5. However, the same contention was raised by the assessee before the Tribunal in present appeal wher....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered by the assessee to receive notices on his behalf. In the very first notice dated March 28, 2008 the endorsement made by V Showed him describing himself as "accountant, Kiran Cinema" and nothing more. The assessee made a specific request to the Assistant Commissioner that a copy of notice under section 148 along with basis and reason of opening the case under section 148 be provided to them to enable him to comply with it. However, the Assistant Commissioner in his reply of the same date continued to show the addresses of the assessee as C/o Kiran Cinema and insisted that notice had been validly served on V, accountant of Kiran Cinema (who also received other notices of the concerned group concerns). Section 292BB is prospective. In any....