SHRI MAHESH K. DHIRMALANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT CEN RG, THANE, THANE
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed
ITA 1918/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2002-2003
Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1918 /Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Mahesh K. Dhirmalani Addl. Cit, Central Range, बनाम/ Flat No.1103 & 1104, Thane, Vs. Ascona, A- Wing, Income Tax Office, Raheja Garden, Pawar Compound, Charai Teen Hath Naka Thane (W) Thane (W) - 400604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adkpd5616N
For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S.Naik (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(2)(ii)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 50B
…wrong against law and facts. In support of this contention the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the law settled by Hon’ble High Court of Gauhati in 3 A.Y. 2002-03 Smt. Bandana Gogoi Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. (2007) 289 ITR 28 (Gau). 5. However, on the other hand the learned representative of the department has refuted the said contention and argued that the notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is directory in nature and is not mandatory, therefore the assessment is not bad in law in view of the law settled in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Third Member in case of Smt. Sumanla…