MR. TRILOK CHAND Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.A.Naren Rudra, learned counsel representing Mr.D.Jagan Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.B.Sapna Reddy, learned senior standing counsel for Income Tax appearing on behalf of the respondent. Perused the record.

(2.) The instant appeal is the one which was filed in the year 2010 and which stood admitted vide order dtd. 29/6/2010. Though initially appeal was admitted on various other grounds that which is reflected in the memo itself, however, today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in addition to the grounds of appeal already raised, one more crucial substantial question of law which needs to be considered and which the learned counsel for the appellant formulates is: "Whether the notice under Sec. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act is required to be served or issued within the prescribed period reckoned from the last day of the month in which the return of income is filed by the assessee?"

(3.) Ms.B.Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department who opposes such a request being made at this juncture particularly when the appeal is of the year 2010, however, considering the fact that provisions of Sec. 260-A(4) provides for the Court to frame any legal grounds which crops up for hearing at a later stage or at the time of hearing strengthens the claim of the appellant so far as raising the aforesaid substantial question of law. We, accordingly allow the same.