ORDER

Per N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President

These are appeals by the three different assessees against three different orders dated 27.11.2017 and 22.11.2017 of CIT(Appeals)-5, Bengaluru, and dated 03.01.2018 of CIT(Appeals)-10, Bengaluru, all relating to assessment year 2008-09. Since some common issues are involved in these appeals, they were heard together and we deem it convenient to pass a common order.

2. We shall first take up for consideration the appeals in ITA No.1798 & 1203/Bang/2018 in which the two assessees have challenged the validity of notice issued u/s. 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] as bad in law on the ground that it is issued beyond a period of six years from the end of relevant assessment year.

3. The assessees in both these appeals are individuals. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to both the assessees dated 31.03.2015 by the AO for the purpose of making a reassessment u/s. 147 of the Act in respect of income that has escaped assessment. As per the provisions of section 148 of the Act, before making a reassessment u/s. 147, the AO has to serve on the assessee notice requiring him to furnish a return. Section 149 of the Act prescribes time limit for issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. It is not in dispute that the time limit applicable in the case of both the assessees is a period of six years from the end of relevant assessment year. The relevant assessment year being AY 2008-09, the period of six years would end on 31.3.2015.

4. The dispute in both these appeals is with regard to the date on which the notice dated 31.03.2015 u/s. 148 of the Act was issued by the AO. It is not in dispute that though the notice u/s. 148 of the Act in the case of both assessees is dated 31.03.2015, the same was handed over to the postal authorities for the purpose of service on the assessee only on 01.04.2015. The question that needs to be decided therefore is as to, whether the date of issue of notice should be taken as the date on which the notices bear or the date on which the notice was handed over to the postal authorities for the purpose of service on the assessee. The plea of the assessee is that the date of issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act is the date on which the letter containing the notice addressed to the assessee and proper postage stamp paid is delivered to the post office for the purpose of transmission to the assessee. The assessee in this regard has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt {2011] 12 taxmann.com 198 (Guj). In the aforesaid case, the last date of limitation for issue of notice u/s. 148 was 31.02.2010. However, the said notices were sent for booking at the Speed Post Centre on 07.04.2010. The question before the court was as to, whether the date of issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act should be 31.03.2010 or 07.04.2010. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held as follows:-

“14. In the background of the aforesaid facts and contentions, the core issue that arises for consideration is as to when can the notice under section 148 of the Act be said to have been issued. In this context it would be necessary to examine the true import of the expression "shall be issued" as employed in section 149 of the Act.

15. The expression "issue" has been defined in Black's Law Dictionary to mean "To send forth; to emit; to promulgate; as, an officer issues orders, process issues from court. To put into circulation; as, the treasury issues notes. To send out, to send out officially; to deliver, for use, or authoritatively; to go forth as authoritative or binding. When used with reference to writs, process, and the like, the term is ordinarily construed as importing delivery to the proper person, or to the proper officer for service etc.

15.1 In P. Ramanathan Aiyer's Law Lexicon the word "issue" has been defined as follows:

"Issue. As a noun, the act of sending or causing to go forth; a moving out of any enclosed place; egress; th