26 January 2013
your note sec 156 Notice demand in what Notice pursuance particulars are not there, so it is not clear so kindly provide details to answer correctly please!
26 January 2013
for eg if 156 notice is in pursuance to Notice u/s 144 r/w 143(2) and 142(1) after expiry of 12 months limit of time prescribed for retuen filed 12 months before the u/s 144 Notice r/w 143(2) and 142(1), naturally 156 Notice is invalid and void as Notice u/s 144 notice issued beyond limitation then notice u/s 156 automatically dies a natural death, even if the CIT persists and in such case move tribunal or HC which will cancel the first impinged notice in terms of Khurbhan hussain metcofferwala case by SC judgement which upheld Mysore high court judgement which is also followed in Arsina Hotels v DCIT. Several times revenue moves headlong so as to terrorize assesees and some how get revenue that practice is very unfair, so evenBombay high court in a matter ACIT asking CIT to transfer the case to pune from mumbai, in this case High court pulled up the CIT and ACIT, which every one knows is it not
CAclubindia
