prosecution for non compliance of IT notice u/s 142 not served
This query is : Resolved
01 August 2007
A notice was not served properly and prosecution started by IT dept. Are there Court decisions on the matter?
01 September 2007
The law is very clear that the onus to prove service of notice lies on the department. In absence of evidence of service of notice the assessment, penalty, 263 all proceedings are held to be bad in law. Your line of defense should be that in absence of valid service of notice no compliance is possible hence there is no question of default in compliance. One on the decisions I can recall is of Calcutta High Court which has canceled the assessment due to non service of notice.
Calcutta High Court in the case of K N Banerjee Vs CIT reported as 238 ITR 634 (Cal) has held as follows:
We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that the service by registered post of the notices allegedly sent to the appellant writ applicant, resulting in the passing of the order under section 147 of the Act was not properly effected or accomplished. Since, admittedly, the service of such notices was a necessary pre-requisite, a condition precedent for passing of the orders under section 147 of the Act, we also have no hesitation in holding that such orders were bad in law, and, therefore, the proceedings under section 263 of the Act, admittedly, originating from such orders could not be initiated against the appellants.
I hope you will be able to locate several such decisions in this line.
Calcutta High Court in the case of K N Banerjee Vs CIT reported as 238 ITR 634 (Cal) has held as follows:
We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that the service by registered post of the notices allegedly sent to the appellant writ applicant, resulting in the passing of the order under section 147 of the Act was not properly effected or accomplished. Since, admittedly, the service of such notices was a necessary pre-requisite, a condition precedent for passing of the orders under section 147 of the Act, we also have no hesitation in holding that such orders were bad in law, and, therefore, the proceedings under section 263 of the Act, admittedly, originating from such orders could not be initiated against the appellants.
I hope you will be able to locate several such decisions in this line.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Refund Annexure-B
- Liable to deduct tds and 44ADA
- Sale of Equity shares for Purchase of Residential Property
- Nomination of Bank for refund in itr 2
- Section 56(2) of the Income tax Act 1961 , Gift to relative .
- ECO SUPPLY REPORTIONG IN GSTR-1
- Is Interest applicable for payment made through credit ledger vide DRC03 for FY 2020-21 & 2021-22
- CCFS 2026 Schemed
- Subscription paid to foreign customer
- Two seprate Invoice needed
- E Commerce GSTR1 & 3B how to file
- GST Cancellation without jurisdiction
- Legal Opinion on Registrar's Refusal to Investigate a Society for Non-Renewal and Non-Compliance
- GST Refund_RFD-01
- Form10BD was uploaded successfully without any Error but after 24 hours, Form10BE are not available
- Annexure B utility for GST Refund
- Tax amount diff in Gstr1 and 3B in tax compare reports
- Tds on GST in connection with sale to public company
- Restoration of certificate of practice
- Regarding change in correspondence address in SSP portal
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
CAclubindia
