Assessee contended that he was remanded to judicial custody on his appearance before the criminal court on March 29, 2017 and he was released on bail only on August 11, 2017. This fact was not seen disputed in the statement filed on behalf of the respondents. In so far as the assessee was in jail when notice was ordered in the proceedings initiated against him under section 179, the notice should have been served on him through the Superintendent of the jail wherein he was detained. The course admittedly had not been adopted by the respondents. In the circumstances, the order was liable to be set aside and the matter had to be considered afresh. Court held that an order under section 179 cannot be passed without affording the parties concerned an opportunity of hearing.( AY.2009-10 to 2015-16 )