9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (12) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore such quantification was made - the petitioners having failed to prove that they suffered any injury or that any legal right of theirs has been affected by the demand made from them, they cannot invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court - - - - - Dated:- 15-12-1971 - Judge(s) : R. S. PATHAK., HARI SWARUP. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by HARI SWARUP J.- This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single judge, dismissing the writ petition. The petition was filed against the orders of the Income-tax Officer, requiring the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 2,61,378. Five notices had been issued to the petitioner under section 34(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The petitioner on 8th Sep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d per his order dated 12th July, 1962, and by subsequent orders. The assessees on June 1, 1962, made a representation to the Central Board of Revenue alleging that clause 7 having not been incorporated in terms of the order passed by the Central Board of Revenue under section 34(1A) of the Act, the amount was not payable. The representation was sent to the Commissioner of Income-tax who finally rejected it. We are informed that the amount demanded has by now been paid up. The learned single judge dismissed the writ petition holding that under this settlement there was a liability created on the petitioners to pay the amount in accordance with clause 7 thereof and that the petitioner had not proved that the amount demanded was in excess of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 lakhs was being paid in instalments. This liability was an additional liability to the liability of Rs. 44,06,672 already quantified. The order passed by the Central Board of Revenue under section 34(1B) of the Act shows that the proposed terms of the agreement were accepted in full. This is clear from the order which reads : "...whereas the said terms of settlement have been considered by the Central Board of Revenue and approved by the Central Government. And whereas the Central Board of Revenue have, after such consideration and approval, accepted the terms of settlement." We have thus no doubt that the assessee was liable to pay to the Government a further sum equal to 2/3rd of the net and overall appreciation that may take pla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
