1957 (3) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....After the assessee had' filed its return, a notice was given to it under Section 22 of the Income-tax Act. It was held by the Income-tax Officer that the assessee had failed to comply with this notice. -In addition, it was held by the Income-tax Officer that there had been deliberate suppression of certain profits by the assessee. On these findings, the assessee was assessed under Section 23 (4) of the Income-tax Act on the 31st of August 1945. Before this assessment order was passed, a notice was issued to the assessee purporting to be under Section 28 (3) of the Income-tax Act asking it to show cause why a penalty should not be imposed. The assessee replied to this notice on the 24th of November 1945. In the meantime, on the 30th of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard." 4. The practice of the Income-tax Department no doubt is that a printed notice is issued calling upon the assessee to submit his, explanation either in writing or in person when the Income-tax Officer proposes to impose a penalty under Section 28 (1) of the Act. Such a notice not being prescribed under any provision of law, no question can arise about the validity of such a notice or the fresh issue of such a notice in a case like the one before us. The only basis on which a penalty imposed can be challenged under Section 28 (3) of the Income-tax Act can be that the assessee was neither heard nor was he given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. In the instant case, we find....