1981 (1) TMI 97
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esh assessment had to be completed normally before 31st March, 1977. However, as the addition to be made in the assessment was more than Rs. 1 lakh, the ITO prepared a draft assessment order. The forwarding letter accompanying the draft assessment order is dt. 28th Feb., 1977. It was, however, registered at the post office on 10th March, 1977 and served on the assessee on 28th March, 1977. The assessee filed objections to the draft assessment order on 4th April, 1977. The IAC issued direction under section 144B to the ITO on 29th July 1977 which were received by him on the same date. The final assessment order was passed on 24th Aug., 1977. In the appeal before the learned CIT (A), it was contended by the learned counsel for the assessee th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ipt of directions from the IAC since the period between 28th Feb., 1977 and 31st March, 1977 was 31 days. Aggrieved by this order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. Shri Jain, learned counsel for the assessee took us through the decision of the Supreme Court in Benarsi Devi vs. ITO (1964) 53 ITR 100 (SC) and the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Kundanlal Beharilal vs. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 359 (All). In particular, he referred to the observations of the Allahabad High Court at page 360 to the effect that a notice cannot be said to be issued unless it is served. He also referred ot the decision of the Andra Pradesh High Court in CIT vs. Smt. Kailash Devi & Smt. Rukmini Devi Bai (176) 105 ITR 479 (AP) where the contention of the le....