1974 (11) TMI 27 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Interpretation of the word "issue" in section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

The judgment dealt with the interpretation of the word "issue" in section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioner received a notice under section 148 but claimed it was not served upon him within the prescribed time limit. The key contention was whether the word "issue" in section 148 includes the service of the notice or not. The petitioner argued that "serve" and "issue" are interchangeable words, while the respondents contended that "issue" only means "send." The court analyzed the relevant sections of the Act and previous judicial interpretations to determine the meaning of the word "issue" in this context.

The court found merit in the petitioner's argument, noting that the provisions of the Act were similar to the previous legislation and that judicial interpretations supported the interchangeable use of "issue" and "serve." Referring to previous Supreme Court and High Court decisions, the court emphasized that the words "issue" and "serve" should be considered interchangeable in this context. The court rejected the revenue's argument that the two words had different meanings in different sections of the Act, stating that the notice must be both issued and served within the prescribed time limit for the Income-tax Officer to assume jurisdiction for assessment, reassessment, or recomputation. The court cited relevant case law and legislative practices to support its interpretation of the word "issue" in section 148.

The court concluded that the word "issue" in section 148 should be interpreted to include the service of the notice, aligning with the petitioner's argument. The court highlighted that the appeal against the Income-tax Officer's order was pending and would be decided separately. The writ petition was disposed of based on the interpretation of the word "issue" in section 148, with no costs awarded. The judgment was delivered by Rajendra Nath Mittal J., with agreement from Man Mohan Singh Gujral J.