It is the duty of Ld CIT to find out to what extent the estimate already made by AO

Last updated: 10 July 2012

Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Brief :
Adverting first to ground no.1 in the appeal, facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring income of ``5,06,170/- filed on 31.07.2008 by the assessee, was selected for scrutiny with the service of a notice u/s 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). In response, Shri Sanjeev Chaudhary, AR on behalf of the assessee, sought adjournment to 16.10.2009, when again adjournment was sought for 30th October, 2009. On that date none attended nor submitted any reply. Even the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, fixing the hearing for 29.12.2009 and subsequent notice u/s 143(2) of the Act issued on 11.5.2010 went unresponded. Subsequently, in response to a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act issued on 4.8.2010 along a with a questionnaire, the ld. AR sought adjournment for 20.8.2010,when again none attended nor submitted any reply. Another notice issued on 24.9.2010 u/s 143(2) of the Act and notice u/s 142(1) of the Act ,issued on 8.10.2010,also went unresponded nor the assessee submitted any reply. In view of the persistent non compliance of various notices as aforesaid ,the Assessing Officer[AO in short] proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Act.

Citation :
Assistant CIT, Sonepat Circle, Sonepat (Appellant) Vs. Shri Subhash Chander, 99, T.P. Scheme, Delhi Road, Sonepat [PAN AGNPC 7984 J ](Respondent)

Daily Limit Reached