The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hisar v. Jind Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., Jind

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.447 of 2009(O&M)Date of decision: 19.8.2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hisar. Vs. Jind Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., Jind. -----Appellant -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:-Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counselfor the Revenue. for the Revenue. ----- ORDER: 1. The Revenue has preferred this appeal under Section260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) againstorder dated 29.8.2008 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Delhi Bench ‘B’, New Delhi passed in I.T.A. No.571/Del/2006 forthe assessment year 2002-03, proposing to raise followingsubstantial questions of law:- “(i)Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the ld. ITAT was right in quashingthe assessment order dated 14.03.2005 on theground that notice u/s 143(2) was not servedupon the assessee within the limitation providedin this section especially when notice u/s 143(2)of the Act dated 27.10.2003 was sent throughof the case, the ld. ITAT was right in quashingthe assessment order dated 14.03.2005 on theground that notice u/s 143(2) was not servedupon the assessee within the limitation providedin this section especially when notice u/s 143(2)of the Act dated 27.10.2003 was sent through Regd. Post dated 29.10.2003 with properlyaddressed and prepared amount which is apresumption of effective service of notice undersection 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1987.And the First Appellate Authority beyond doubthas presumed that the service has beeneffected within 12 months of receipt of return ofincome / loss upon the appellant on 31.10.2003i.e. on the third day of sending the same byRegistered Post?” (ii) Whether on the facts and in circumstances ofthe case, the Ld. ITAT was right in admittingwithout recording reasons the additionalevidence in the shape of original envelopebearing the stamp of Postal Authorities forservice of notice produced by the assessee insupport of its claim of delayed service of noticefor which the AO was not given opportunity toexamine the same?”the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in admittingwithout recording reasons the additionalevidence in the shape of original envelopebearing the stamp of Postal Authorities forservice of notice produced by the assessee insupport of its claim of delayed service of noticefor which the AO was not given opportunity toexamine the same?” 2. The assessee is a cooperative society engaged in the business of running sugar mill. It filed its return on 31.10.2002,declaring loss, which was processed. Thereafter, notice underSection 143(2) was sent on 27.10.2003. The Assessing Officermade additions. Appeal of the assessee was partly allowed. TheTribunal upheld the deletion and made further deletion. It washeld that service of notice was beyond the period of one year offiling of the return. Service was effected on 1.11.2003. The dateof service was clear from the original envelope produced by theassessee. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 4. Only contention raised on behalf of the appellant isthat presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act,1897 should have been drawn and that the assessee should nothave been allowed to give additional evidence in the shape oforiginal return. 5. We do not find any merit in the submission. 6. Presumption under Section 27 of the General ClausesAct is only with regard to notice being received and not as to dateof receipt. Permitting the original envelope to be produced,cannot be held to have caused any prejudice to the revenue. Inany case, this contention is in the realm of appreciation ofevidence. No substantial question of law arises. 7. The appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE August 19, 2009CHAUDHARY )ashwani ( JUDGE DAYA