HC : Re-assessment not void for want of proper service of notice u/s. 282(2)

Delhi HC sets aside ITAT order quashing re-assessment for AY 1995-96 on the ground that service of Sec. 148 notice on a person other than ‘principal officer’ as contemplated in Sec. 282(2) [as prevalent at the relevant time] , was not a valid service, HC rules that “re-assessment u/s. 147/148 not invalid or void for want of proper service of notice”; HC observes that Sec. 148 notice was sent by registered post at assessee-company’s factory premises but was served on the security guard, however, upon service of the said notice, assessee’s director (i.e. principal officer) had appeared before the AO; Firstly, HC observes that use of the word "may" in Sec. 282(2) reflects that this provision is permissive and not mandatory, next HC rules that “A company being a juristic and a legal person, service cannot be in person on the Company, and has to be affected by sending the notice to the registered office or at the place of business”; Holding that the object and purpose of service of notice was to inform and make the company aware about Sec. 147/148 proceedings initiation, HC holds that in the context of present case, “Initiation to this extent was valid.”, moreover, HC notes that assessee did not raise the question about validity of service before the AO; However, remands matter back as ITAT did not decide the appeal on merits, distinguishes assessee’s reliance on plethora of rulings including co-ordinate bench ruling in Rajesh Kumar Sharma, follows co-ordinate bench ruling in Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited:HC