Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (2) TMI 1168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed 12.12.2008. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that both the appeals by assessee are delayed by 105 days and assessee has filed condonation petitions supported by affidavits stating that the assessee is suffering from heart ailment and was implanted pacemaker few weeks before the month of November, 2012 and appeal was filed before ITAT on 19.03.2013. The appellate order was served on assessee on 05.12.2012 and appeal was filed with a delay of 44 days only whereas registry has mentioned the delay of 105 days by taking the date of service as 5th October, 2012 but actually the service was done on 05.12.2012. On this, when a query was put to Ld. Sr. DR, he fairly conceded the position. In term of the above, as the cause is reasonable for the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gued that notices issued after 31.03.2005 for AY 1998-99 and after 31.03.2006 for AY 1999-2000 were barred by limitation. In view of these facts he relied on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the case of Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) Vs. Hiren Bhatt or His Successors to Office & Ors. (2011) 334 ITR 25 (Guj), wherein it is held as under (from headnotes): "In this regard, the record produced before the court is sufficient to come to the conclusion that the notices had been sent for booking to the speed post centre only on 7-4-2010, in absence of any evidence to the contrary being pointed out by the respondents, as well in the light of the fact that the said position as confirmed by the Postal Department has not been controverted by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t 31-3-2010, as contended on behalf of the revenue. In the circumstances, impugned notices under section 148 in relation to assessment year 2003-04, having been issued on 7-4-2010 which is clearly beyond the period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year, are clearly barred by limitation and as such, cannot be sustained." 5. I have examined the case records including assessment records and found that the notices issued u/s. 148 was dated 30.03.2005 and 31.03.2006 for AYs 1998-99 and 1999-2000 respectively but, these were issued, as admitted by Ld. Sr. DR, after 31.03.2005 and 31.03.2006. And records clearly shows that both the notices were handed over to Postal Authorities on 05.04.2005 and 07.04.2006 for AYs 1998-1999 ....