COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. LUNAR DIAMONDS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCORDING to the assessee, in terms of s. 143(2) of the Act, the notice ought to have been served on it within a period assessee were not in accordance with law.

(2.) BEFORE the AO, this issue was not directly raised but before the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], it was contended by the assessee that it had not received any notice under s. 143(2) of the Act by registered post. An affidavit to this effect was filed by one J.S. Walia, DGM (Accounts) and in -charge of taxation matters of the assessee. It was also submitted that the alleged notice was not sent acknowledgement due. It was contended that the receipt issued by the post office did not bear the address of the assessee but only its name. It was, therefore, submitted that there was a possibility that the correct address of the assessee might not have been written on the envelope and, therefore, the question of service of notice on the assessee did not arise. The contention of the assessee was accepted by the CIT (A) and it was held that there was no valid service of notice on the assessee and, therefore, the assessment framed was invalid.

(3.) THE appellant took -up the matter in appeal before the