1985 (11) TMI 73

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e appellant. (2) The case was not heard on that day on account of the adjournment by Departmental Representative. (3) Your office issued a Combined Notice for GTA 60 & 64/Ahd/84 dt. 15th March, 1985, fixing the hearing on 28th March, 1985 and no separate notice was given to the above referred assessee. (4) The notice was not a "Speaking Notice" giving proper and adequate notice of enhancement in clear terms. Actually, the Notice was given in such a way that enough and proper attention of the assessee was not drawn giving him the implication of what the Notice under s. 23(5) meant. (5) A proper and separate show cause notice of enhancement giving proper information and what was sought to be relied and considered by the Hon'ble Tr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n viz. s. 23 (5) of the GT Act is referred to in notice. 4. In our opinion, there is no mistake in the order requiring rectification. The basis that there is enhancement in the value of the gift as per order passed by the Tribunal itself its non-existent because the Tribunal has not made any enhancement. It has only directed that GTO to value the shares, the value may be either lower of higher than it was before the Tribunal. For ready reference the relevant para 6.2 is reproduced below: "We therefore, set aside the order of the AAC of Gift-tax and direct the GTO to make an assessment on the basis of maintainable profit since the dividends to no reflect the profit earning capacity of the company on the basis of decision in the case of....