9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (6) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax for the assessment year 1951-52 in the status of an unregistered firm and the share income of the petitioner was determined at a particular sum and the said amount so determined was subjected to tax as well. The firm took up the matter further to the higher hierarchy and questioned the order of assessment of the Income-tax Officer, which determined the status of the petitioner as an unregistere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the Income-tax (Amendment) Act of 1953, and came into effect from 1st April, 1952, the law which prevailed on that date ought to apply and that, in that sense, there being no corresponding provision in the earlier enactment such as section 35(5), the assessment is bad and without jurisdiction. The second contention, which is not found in the affidavit in support of the writ petition, is th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d consequential proceedings to be undertaken by the Tribunal and the officers concerned. It is on the basis of this that the Tribunal made the order on June 16, 1961, pursuant to which the department took up the matter once over so as to remedy the defect which had gone into the record. I shall advert to this aspect later. Regarding the second contention it is fundamental to expect that all offici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hallenge against the impugned order. The other contention has also to fail. In fact, it was the order of the High Court, followed up by the directive of the Tribunal, that was responsible for the reassessment and this reassessment was made at a time when section 35(5) was in the statute book, having been inserted in 1952. The petitioner cannot approbate and reprobate. If he desires to go back to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
