Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 2 vs M/S Vallabh Pesticides Ltd. on 16 April, 2018
Another Division Bench of this court in Bhaskaran vs. Addl.
ITO (1963) 47 ITR 334, noticing the decisions on the point,
observed
'....where the rights of a person are effected by an order and
limitation is prescribed for the enforcement of the
remedy.....The making of the order must mean either actual or
constructive communication of the said order to the party
concerned..........'
9.2 From the facts of the applicant's case, we find that
till 29.12.2017, i.e. the date on which the order was served on
the applicant, the applicant was not aware of the assessment
order passed by the A.O and thus the applicant cannot be
deprived of its right to approach the Commission on
27.12.2017 for an alternative remedy. Therefore, we are of the
considered view that service of notice on the applicant is
crucial and it was not done on or before 27.12.2017 when the
applicant has filed settlement application and also intimated
the same to the AO u/s. 245C(4) on the date. It is worth noting
that when the intimation of having filed the settlement
application was served by the applicant on the A.O on
27.12.2017 the A.O. duly accepted it without mentioning on it
on informing that the order had already been passed.