The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Pune v. Shri Bharat Baburao Patil (Huf

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1101 OF 2012 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Pune..Appellant. Versus Shri Bharat Baburao Patil (HUF) ..Respondent. Mr.Vimal Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr.N.A. Kazi for the appellant.None for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 7[th] January 2013 P.C. : 1.Office objections waived. 2.The questions of law raised by the Revenue in this appeal reads thus : a)Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was justified in holding taht the assessment was not valid since notice under Section 143(2) was not served within the prescribed was justified in holding taht the assessment was not valid since notice under Section 143(2) was not served within the prescribed period, even though the assessee acquiesced in the proceedings before the assessing officer and, therefore, the provisions of Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act were applicable ?before the assessing officer and, therefore, the provisions of Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act were applicable ? b)Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the provisions of Section 292BB of the Income-Tax Act are clarificatory in nature and, therefore, can be applied retrospectively?law the provisions of Section 292BB of the Income-Tax Act are clarificatory in nature and, therefore, can be applied retrospectively? 3.Counsel for the Revenue fairly states that similar questions raised by the Revenue in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Jayraj Kapadia, being Income Tax Appeal No.5487 of 2010 have been dismissed by this Court on 15[th] July 2011. 4.For the reasons stated therein, the present appeal is also dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S. Sanklecha, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)