SERVICE OF NOTICE
Notice in the name of Company received by Director – Attended further proceedings – Later on cannot challenge validity of service of notice.
Southern Plantations Ltd.Vs Commissioner of Agrl. IT (Ker) 236 ITR 509
Chartered Accountant representing assessee received notice and assessee ratified receipt of notice – Estoppel from challenging service of notice on Chartered Accountant.
Y. Rajendra, DCIT Vs Khoday Eshwarsa & Sons & Ors. (Kar) 272 ITR 448
Notice served on assessee's husband – Assessee participating in proceeding – valid service
CIT Vs Kanti Devi Gupta (MP) 274 ITR 526
CIT Vs Uttam Chand Nahar (Raj) 295 ITR 403
Notice served on the father of the assessee who was also the Managing Partner of the firm in which assessee is a partner – Service valid
Latha Chandy Vs CIT (Ker) 260 ITR 385
Notice by affixture – No objection to mode of service of notice – Assessee participating in proceedings before Assessing Officer and CIT(A) – Irregularity in notice waived by assessee - assessment valid.
CIT Vs Premium Capital Market & Investment Ltd (MP) 275 ITR 260
Notices dispatched by Registered Post – Either not received back or received back with endorsement "refused" – Deemed service
Ramesh Khosla Vs ITO & Anr. (P&H) 155 ITR 556
Notice send by speed post – Quite reasonable to infer that it was served within 3-4 days
Capital Gem Overseas (P) Ltd. Vs ITO ( ITAT, Del ) 101 ITD 117
Service of notice on agent – Different persons have acted in the past in absence of power agent to receive notices – Service on one such person – Notices were complied with – Assessee raised no objection before ITO – such service constitute valid service.
A.K. M. Govindaswamy Chettiar & Ors.Vs ITO (Mad) 244 ITR 559
X vs. ITO (ITAT, Bang) 9 ITD 715
CIT Vs Regency Express Builders P. Ltd. (Del) 291 ITR 55
Receipt of notice by employee who endorsed his acknowledgement under the seal of firm – Valid service
M.X. De Nornha & Sons Vs CIT (All) 18 ITR 928
Though the notice sent to assessee firm was served on a person who was not a partner of assessee firm, it is valid as the assessee failed to establish that such person was a stranger and was not concerned with day-to-day business of the firm.
Salar Publications Trust Vs ITO & Anr. (Kar) 235 ITR 13
Assessee for the first time filed affidavit before ITAT in which it denied receipt of notice under section 143(2) – ITAT erred in placing reliance on such belated affidavit – Presumption of service of notice not successfully rebutted by assessee.
CIT Vs Vins Overseas India Ltd (Del) 165 Taxman 95
Burden on assessee to prove that there was no service of notice under section 143(2) within time
CIT Vs Shanker Lal Ved Prakash (Del) 300 ITR 243
"Forwarding" of draft assessment order – date on which it was given to process-server or delivered at post office or handed over to representative of assessee.
CIT Vs Shahzadi Begum (AP) 225 ITR 963.