SN SOPARKAR Vs. MAUNA BHATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. A. MEHTA)This petition was originally filed challenging notices issued by the respondent under section 148 of the I. T. Act, 1961 [the Act] for A. Ys. 93-94, 94-95 and 95-96. At the time of admission on 23. 11. 99, the Court recorded that 'smr. Soparkar does not press this Spl. C. A. insofar as it relates to assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96'.

(2.) LEARNED senior Advocate for the petitioner states that return of income for A. Y. 93-94 was filed declaring income of Rs. 16,32,594-00. On 10. 01. 96 assessment order under section 143 (3) of the Act came to be made assessing total income of Rs. 16,55,090/ -. The respondent issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 16. 01. 97. It was contended that considering the reasons recorded for A. Y. 93-94, which appear as annexure to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent, it was apparent that reasons had not been recorded on the day the impugned notice was issued because the reasons are dated 15. 01. 98. Learned counsel, therefore, argued that the impugned notice for A. Y. 93-94 is required to be quashed and set aside in light of the provisions of section 148 (2) of the Act.

(3.) LEARNED Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent authority has placed on record xerox copy of notice under section 148 of the Act for A. Y. 93-94 which bears two dates: (1 ). 16. 01. 97, and, (2 ). 16. 01. 98 - with some illegible noting preceding the date 16. 01. 98. It was suggested by the learned counsel that the endorsement appears to be 'served by'. It was thus contended that the reasons were recorded on 15. 01. 98 and the impugned notice was actually served on 16. 01. 98 and not 16. 01. 97 as contended by the petitioner. Section 148 (2) of the Act reads as under: 'sthe Assessing Officer shall, before issuing any notice under this section, record his reasons for doing so'.