9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appears to have issued the notices only to verify as to whether any amount was received by them has escaped assessment. The decision of the learned single judge, in our opinion, is not prejudicial to the interest of the writ petitioners/appellants. The appellants failed to make out any case for interference with the impugned judgment – petition is dismissed - - - - - Dated:- 9-8-2006 - Judge(s) : D. BISWAS., T. NANDAKUMAR SINGH. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by D. Biswas J.- By this common judgment and order we propose to dispose of W.A. No. 585 of 2002 and W.A. No. 586 of 2002 arising out of the judgment and orders dated October 10, 2002, passed by the learned single judge in W.P(C) No. 6733 of 2002 and W.P(C) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt in the case of M/s. Down Town Hospital Ltd. based upon which the proceedings under section 158BD have been initiated in the case of the writ petitioners/appellants. Consequently, the appellants submitted applications before respondent No. 2, i.e., the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Guwahati, challenging the jurisdiction of the authority in invoking the powers under section 158BD of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the "undisclosed income" purportedly received by the writ petitioners/appellants from M/s. Down Town Hospital Ltd. had already been assessed as "undisclosed income" of M/s. Down Town Hospital Ltd. under section 158BC(c)/143(3) on February 28, 2001. A request was also made for dropping the proceeding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -tax Act, 1961. So, you are hereby requested to furnish the return of income within 15 days from the date of receipt of this letter by you. In view of the above, your petition for dropping of proceedings initiated under section 158BD of the Income-tax Act, 1961, stands rejected." The learned single judge after hearing learned counsel for the parties by the impugned judgment and order dismissed the writ petitions with the observations that the writ petitioners/appellants could not make out a case of double taxation and this cannot be a case of double taxation if it is disclosed that the writ petitioners/appellants had received more amount from M/s. Down Town Hospital Ltd. as shown by them because in that case the writ petitioners/appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir income-tax return and, therefore, they are not liable for payment of any tax beyond the amount they have received. The judgment and order under appeal clearly shows that the learned single judge has not decided the question of satisfaction, but left the entire matter at the discretion of the respondent authority to decide whether the explanations given by the writ petitioners/appellants are acceptable or not. The notices impugned in the writ petitions were issued for the reasons given in para. 3 of the letter dated September 23, 2002, which impliedly suggest that the jurisdiction under section 158BD was invoked on being satisfied that "undisclosed income" escaped assessment. The plea of double taxation, in our opinion, is also of n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
