Commissioner of Income Tax vs Inderpal Malhotra

The revenue is aggrieved by an order dated 31-5-2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench B'' in ITA No. 416/Delhi/1996 relevant for the assessment year 1992-93.

The only issue that arises in this case is whether notice u/s 143(2) was served on the assessee within the period of limitation.

It transpires from a perusal of the record of the case that the notice was actually issued on 30-11-1993 by registered post, which was the last date of limitation. There is no way that the notice could have been received by the assessee on the same day unless the notice was sent by hand, which is not so in the present case,

In Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vardhman Estate P. Ltd., , a notice was sent by speed post one day before the period of limitation was to expire that is, on 30-10-2002 and the contention urged by the revenue in that case was that the notice sent should be deemed to have been served on the assessee. This argument was rejected by this court and it was made clear that what is required by the statute is not merely the dispatch or issuance of the notice but its actual service.

Since in the present case it is admitted that as a matter of fact notice was issued by registered post on the last day of the period of limitation and by no other method, there was no possibility of it being served in time. No substantial question of law arises.

Dismissed.