UNNIKRISHNAN C Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALTHOUGH the questions that are referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, are purely of factual character, with anxiety we have considered even that aspect on going through the material on record. The said questions are as follows :

(2.) THE assessment year is 1980-81. THE assessee did not file any return of income. Notice under Section148 of the Act was issued and thereafter the assessee filed a nil return on October 20, 1983. THErefore, the Income-tax Officer took resort to Section143(2) of the Act and Section142(1) of the Act as well as issuance of summons under Section131 of the Act. THE Assessing Officer finding no response, had to proceed to complete the assessment under Section144 of the Act on the basis of best judgment assessment. It is also pertinent to note that even thereafter no action was taken by the assessee, under Section146 of the Act to reopen the assessment.

(3.) OBVIOUSLY, the Commissioner proceeded on the general law of presumption that if the address is correct and additionally if the demand notice and the assessment order are admitted to have been received by the assessee at the same address it will have to be presumed that earlier notices under Sections 143(2), 142(1) along with the summons under Section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which were served at the same address should be presumed to have been received, there being no evidence in rebuttal in regard thereto.