Law:

Section:

Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - General - Assessment year 1992-93 - Whether while issuing notice under section 148, where bias of ITO against assessee was evident from communication, in such a situation, case of assessee was to be placed before another officer for hearing, and notice was to be issued to ITO to explain his stand and to submit his objection in matter - Held, yes FACTS The respondent-ITO had issued a notice to the petitioner under section 142, wherein the petitioner was asked to remain present on 14-2-2003 before him. The case of the petitioner was that he found from the said letter only that a notice under section 148 was alleged to have been issued to the petitioner in the year 2001. Thus, in response to above notice fixing the date as 14-2-2003, the petitioner gave two letters to the respondent and requested inspection of the complete file pertaining to the proceedings against the assessee and requested for grant of certified copies. The petitioner had also requested the respondent-ITO to provide the reasons recorded by the Assistant Director for issuance of notice under section 148. In response to letters given by the petitioner, the ITO vide communication dated 13-3-2003 declared that the petitioner had no right to know the reasons for issuance of notice under section 148. The ITO even placed reliance upon a Supreme Court decision for taking aforestated view. In the said communication, the ITO further went to the extent of blaming the petitioner and his tax advisor/lawyers for adopting the delay tactics and even dared the petitioner to go to the Supreme Court. Under those circumstances, the petitioner submitted an application under section 144A for issuing necessary directions by the Addl. Commissioner. HELD In entire communication sent to the petitioner, it did not come on record that when notice under section 148 was served upon the petitioner on 29-5-2001 by the ITO, how and why the proceedings remained pending till the year 2003. That fact became relevant as the ITO blamed the petitioner, his tax advisor and advocates for causing a delay when the petitioner was, for the first time, asked to appear on…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492