Punjab & Haryana High Court interpreting "service of notice/order" in Vat case: The order of appeal communicated by DETC A to the branch of the dealer, where as he had communicated head office address for communications, due to which there was delay of 907 days in filing appeal to the VAT Tribunal. The Vat Tribunal upheld the service under section 27 of General Clauses Act. Punjab and Haryana High Court however held quoting ” The Commissioner of Income Tax, Punjab, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Chandigarh, Patiala V/s Lalita Kapur’ (P&H)(DB), 1970 CurLJ 523, that Division Bench of this Court has already held that presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 stands rebutted in case the service is effected on an assessee under Section 63 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 through its agent never appointed by it, as it shall not be a valid service”. Hence service is invalid and delay condoned- M/s. B.K. Steels VAT AP 214/2014 dated 10-08-2015 Comments: Section 27 of General Clauses Act is applicable under Income tax law also, by virtue of Section 282 of Income tax Act. The above Judgement substantiated that presumption u/S 27 is not non rebuttable.