JUDGMENT

K.S. Jhaveri, J. - By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the department and also partly allowed the cross objection of the assessee for statistical purposes.

2. This court while admitting the matter framed the following question of law:-

"i) Whether the ld. ITAT was right in holding that the notice under section 148 dated 22.03.2010 having been sent through speed post and not having been received back, there was a presumption as to the service of the same ignoring fact that the address on which such notice was sent, was altogether a completely different location and hence no such presumption could have been considered?"

3. Counsel for the appellant Mr. Gargeiya has taken us to the order of the AO wherein it has been observed as under:-

"3.4. On 2.12.2010, the A/R of the assessee has filed two letters. One is of challenging the service of notice. The another is challenging the validity of reasons recorded for initiating proceedings under section 148 of the Act.

i) First letter challenging the service of notice under section 148 is dealt with as under:-

For the sake of convenienc