JAY TEWARI, J. - (1.)THIS order shall dispose of IT Appeal Nos. 484 and 485 of 2007, as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. For the sake of convenience, facts are being extracted from IT Appeal No. 484 of 2007.
(2.)THIS appeal filed by the assessee proposes the following questions of law : "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the notice under s. 148 of the IT Act, was validly served on the assessee ? (ii) Whether in facts and circumstances of the case the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the AO and therefore the ex parte assessment under s. 144 was liable to be set aside. (iii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the AO could invoke the jurisdiction to initiate the reassessment proceedings under s. 147 of the IT Act, on the basis of the VDIS declaration filed under 1997 Scheme contrary to cls. 71 and 72 of the said Scheme and in opposition to Art. 20(3) of the Constitution of India under which no man can be compelled to be witness against himself ? (iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the AO could invoke the jurisdiction to initiate the reassessment proceedings under s. 147 of the IT Act, on the basis of the VDIS declaration filed under 1997 Scheme which was a nullity - letter addressed to the assessee pointing out that though the assessee had filed a declaration under VDIS 1997 disclosing income of Rs. 2 lacs in the form of cash for the asst. yr. 1994 -95 and Rs. 2 lacs for the asst. yr. 1995 -96, it had not paid the due tax and, therefore, the said declaration was deemed not to have been filed as per the provisions of s. 67(2) of the VDIS, 1997. On the basis of this information, the AO framed a fresh assessment vide separate orders dt.
(3.)The assessee's challenge to the reassessment proceedings by way of appeal was rejected. In second appeal, the learned Tribunal held that it cannot be said that reassessment proceedings were initiated merely on the basis of suspicion. The Tribunal also held on fact that service of notice under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961 was proper and further that there was no error in the order of the appellate authority in not setting aside the ex parte assessment. The appeal of the assessee was accordingly dismissed.