Log In

| Recover password


It was a case of a trust that denied its liability in respect of a demand notice issued by the revenue. The assessee preferred a review petition u/s 264 to the CIT and pleaded that there was no service of notice leading to the conclusion that the assessee was afforded no opportunity of being heard. The Madras High Court in the case of Venkat Maicken Trust v. ITO (107TAX391) held that when the assessee pleaded that he had not been properly served with any notice, it was for the department to place the relevant material to substantiate their plea that the assessee was served with proper notices.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

error: Do not copy the content of this website.