In absence of Return of Notice sent by Speed Post it will be presumed to be delivered

CA Sandeep Kanoi Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the letter at page 43 of the assessee’s paper book is not 12th August, 2006 as typed, but was actually, 12th August, 2010 and that this was a typographical error. He submitted that the claim of the D.R. that a notice of demand u/s 156 was issued to the assessee by speed post is not believable. He argued that the acknowledgement which is photocopied on the reverse of notice of demand u/s 156 is no evidence at all. He ridiculed the papers filed by the department and submitted that these do not help the case of the department. He poin...