1971 (11) TMI 17 - HC - Income Tax

Principle of natural justice - doctrine of natural justice cannot be approached in a doctrinaire spirit, but is purely dependent upon established and proved facts. Violation of the principles of natural justice is never assumed ; but has to be traced to existing and acceptable material, and can never be sustained, nor can it exist, in the abstract - Once the authority has the jurisdiction to act and once the impugned notice flows from such jurisdiction vested in a competent officer, this court cannot interdict him at the threshold and quash the proceedings on the assumption that they are totally devoid of jurisdiction in the eye of law

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of individual as part of association of persons under a different name and style, Jurisdiction of Income-tax Officer to issue notice under section 29, Violation of principles of natural justice in assessment proceedings, Legality of notice issued by Income-tax Officer Dindigul demanding payment.

Analysis:

The judgment pertains to the assessment year 1946-47 where the petitioner was initially assessed as an individual with no income. Subsequently, it was discovered that the petitioner was part of an association of persons named "V. Muthuswami Pillai & Co." operating within the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer, Dindigul. The Income-tax Officer at Dindigul issued a notice under section 29 of the Income-tax Act, calling upon the petitioner to pay tax liability as a member of the association. The petitioner did not appeal against this notice, resulting in it becoming final and binding. The petitioner contested his membership in the association but was found to be a member based on evidence and admissions during the assessment proceedings.

The petitioner's appeal against the revised assessment was unsuccessful, leading to a petition under section 33A of the Income-tax Act. However, the petitioner did not challenge his membership status in the association in this petition. Subsequently, a notice was issued by the Income-tax Officer, Dindigul, demanding payment from the petitioner based on the earlier assessment against the association. The petitioner approached the court, arguing lack of jurisdiction in issuing the notice.

The court addressed two main points raised by the petitioner. Firstly, the contention that the assessment proceedings violated the principles of natural justice due to lack of opportunity to challenge the assessment against the association. The court held that the petitioner had ample opportunity during the proceedings to contest his membership status, and his failure to disprove it negated the claim of a violation of natural justice. Secondly, the petitioner argued that the notice issued demanded a larger sum than due, but the court emphasized that jurisdiction of the issuing authority was the main concern in a writ of prohibition, not the contents of the notice.

Ultimately, the court dismissed the petition, ruling that the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to issue the notice was not in question, and the petitioner had sufficient opportunity to present his case during the assessment proceedings. The court found no grounds to interdict the officer's actions or quash the proceedings based on the arguments presented by the petitioner.