9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (9) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TRA J.-This is an application for a certificate under article 133(1)(a) and (b), in the alternative for a certificate under article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution. On September 25, 1963, a notice was served upon the petitioner under section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for rectification of an order of assessment and on September 28, 1963, an order was made by the Income-tax Officer for rectifying the assessment order for the assessment year 1958-59, by adding back Rs. 13,37,370. As a result of certain proceedings, to which it is not necessary to refer for the purpose of this application, an order was made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on November 10, 1962, by which a sum of Rs. 13,37,370 was held to have been actually distributed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r as it stood before rectification, for the assessment year 1958-59, a sum of Rs. 6,00,000 was taken as dividend declared for the purpose of reducing rebate on super-tax in accordance with the Finance Act, 1959. But, owing to the distribution of a further dividend of Rs. 13,37,370, the total amount of dividend declared and distributed came to Rs. 19,37,170, According to the respondents the total amount that should have been taken as dividend declared for the purpose of reducing rebate on super-tax should, therefore, be the said sum of Rs. 19,37,170. It was this mistake which was sought to be rectified by the proceedings under section 35 of the 1922 Act. The judgment of this Bench, from which the petitioner now seeks to prefer an appeal to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d look into the records of the assessee himself in respect of the assessment of other years is a substantial question of law. The next question involved in the appeal was whether the mistake contemplated by section 35 of the 1922 Act must be a mistake which was glaring, obvious and self-evident and not a mistake which could be discovered only by an elaborate and long drawn process of reasoning on points where there might be two opinions. In other words, the argument on behalf of the petitioner was that the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to proceed under section 35 of the Act depended upon the existence of a mistake apparent from the record. On the facts of this case, however, there is hardly any scope for argument that there was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this question cannot also be treated as a substantial question of law. It is now well settled that procedural law, when amended, had retrospective operation and this doctrine of retrospective operation of procedural law meant that pending cases, though instituted under the old Act, would be governed by the new procedure under the amended law. The assessment case was a pending case after service of the notice under section 35 of the 1922 Act, on the date when the impugned order was made, namely, September 28, 1963, when the Income-tax Act, 1961, had already come into operation. The amended procedural law, therefore, should apply to the pending proceedings. This point is also covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Hazari Mal v. Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evi Haralalka's case was upheld by this Bench and the issue of the notice under section 35 of the 1922 Act has been held to be valid in this case. For these reasons we cannot accept the petitioner's contention that there are substantial questions of law involved in this appeal. Turning now to the prayer for certificate under article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution, I should at once point out that the learned advocate for the petitioner did not advance any argument to satisfy us that the case is of such importance as to be treated as a fit case for appeal to the Supreme Court. We are not satisfied that this is a fit case for a certificate under article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution. For the reasons mentioned above, this application is dism ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
