Tek Chand, J. - (1.) This is an income-tax reference in which the following question of law has been referred to us:- "Was the service of-the notice of demand, validiy made on 29th March, 1957?". The facts as contained in the statement drawn up by the Tribunal are as under: The case refers to the assessment year 1947-48 (previous year ending on 31st of March, 1947). The assessee is an individual who resides at No. 8, Toddarmal Road, New Delhi. The assessment had been completed and the assessee requested the Income-tax Officer to reopen the case tinder Section 27 of the Income-tax Act, but this request was not granted. The following chronological resume was given by the Tribunal:-- "23-3-1956: Notice under Section 34 Issued. 28-3-1956: Notice under Section ordinary course, but presence of Inspector. 34 not served In by affixture in the 31-1-1957: Notice under Section 22(4) issued for 21-157. 15-1-1957: Notice under Section 22(4) not served In ordinary course, But by; affixture on 15-14957 In the presence of Inspector; 31-1-1957: Assessment completed under Section 23(4). 27-3-1957: Demand notice sent by registered acknowledgment due post received back with the postal remarks 'Left'. 29-3-1957: Demand notice served presence of Inspector. by affixture in the 27-10-1958: Application assessee. under Section 27filed by the 10-12-1958: Application under Section 27 rejected. 16-1-1959: Order under Section 27 served, by affixture in the presence of Inspector." On 20th of August, 1958, the counsel for the assessee addressed a letter to the Income-tax Officer, District A-1, New Delhi (Exhibit 'A') that no notice of demand has been received by the assessee and regular notice of demand should be issued to him now and a copy of the assessment order should also be supplied. The assessee received reply dated 21st of August, 1958, from the Income-tax Officer (Exhibit A(i)) Informing him that the demand notice and a copy of the assessment order were served by affixture on 29th of March, 1957, as the assessee was out of station as per remarks of the postal authorities on the registered letter.
(2.) The assessee filed an application before the income-tax Officer on 27th of October, 1958, praying that the assessment which had already been completed under Section 23, Sub-section (4) of the Income-tax Act might be reopened. His application was rejected as time barred, it was also stated that proceedings under Section 34 were intimated with the approval of the Commissioner of income-tax ana notice under Section 34 was served by affixture on 28th of March 1956. Later on, notices under Section 22(4) were served by affixture but nobody attended. The application under Section 27 was consequently rejected.
(3.) An appeal was filed against this order of the Income-tax Officer but the Appellate Assistant Commissioner declined to interfere in appeal holding that the application under Section 27 was barred (Vide Exhibit 'C').;