2018 (2) TMI 1377

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... For the assessment year 2010-11, the petitioner had not filed a return of income. Case of the petitioner firm however is that the firm was dissolved on 02.08.2007. One of the erstwhile partners of the firm Mr. Naresh A Desai took-over the business of the firm and started operating the same as proprietory concern. For the relevant assessment year 2008-09, the firm had filed the return of income declaring income till the date of dissolution. The partner had filed the return for the rest of the period. Despite such facts being within the knowledge of the department, impugned notice came to be issued by the Assessing Officer against the firm seeking to assess the firm's income for the assessment year 2010-11. 3. Previously, the petitione....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., in exercise of writ jurisdiction, we do not find any reason to interfere on the ground raised by the petitioner. Petition is therefore dismissed." 4. The present petition is filed, for the same purpose of challenging the very same notice dated 25.03.2017, the only difference being the petitioner having under objection filed return of income has now been supplied the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer which was not the case during the earlier litigation. 5. In such background, counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the Assessing Officer has committed a serious error in issuing the notice against the firm which has been dissolved since long. This fact was known to the department. In any case, in the objections raised....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... we have perused the reasons and heard criticism of such reasons made by the counsel for the petitioner. We still do not find any reason to interfere. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer read as under: "The assessee has not filed its return of income for A.Y. 2010- 11. However, from the data available in ITD System, it is found that TDS has been deducted by M/s. Reliance Retail Ltd u/s. 194C of the Income Tax Act on the amount paid/ credited to M/s. Vinay Printing Press. Therefore it is clear that the assessee firm was in exercise in the period corresponding to AY 2010- 11. As per information received from DCIT Central Circle 1(4) vide letter dated 20.02.2017 during the course of search action u/s. 132A of the Act in the case....