9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (3) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver ornaments. For the assessment year 1953-54, the Income-tax Officer assessed the petitioner on an income of Rs. 10,303 by an assessment order dated July 29, 1953. It is alleged that the petitioner-firm was dissolved in 1959. Subsequently, a notice dated June 26, 1965, under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was served on Murari Lal, a former partner of the firm. The Income-tax Officer made an assessment order dated March 10, 1969, under section 147 of the Act of 1961, computing the total income at Rs. 71,072. Aggrieved by the assessment order the petitioner has filed this petition under article 226 of the Constitution. Sri S. B. L. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the assessment proceeding lay un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taking reassessment proceedings had already expired before the Act of 1961 came into force. That will depend on whether the amount of concealed income, according to the reasons recorded by the Income-tax Officer, exceeded Rs. 1,00,000. We considered it necessary to send for the original record of the income-tax assessment proceeding before us. From the report of the Income-tax Officer recording the reasons, on the basis of which he obtained the sanction of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it seems to us impossible to hold that lie considered that the concealed income exceeded Rs. 1,00,000. The reasons recorded are : " Assessment for 1953-54 was completed on an income of Rs. 10,303. The account books for this period were seized by the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plainly, upon the law laid down by the Supreme Court and this court in the decisions set out above, the Income-tax Officer was not competent to take the proceedings at all, inasmuch as the period of limitation for doing so had expired. An objection has been taken on behalf of the respondents that an alternative remedy was available to the petitioner by way of appeal under the statute and that the petitioner should be compelled to have recourse to that remedy. Indeed, it is pointed out, the petitioner has actually preferred an appeal against the assessment order and that the appeal is pending. It seems to us that when on the plain facts of the case it appears ex facie that the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction, it is not necessary tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
