9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by directing the respondent-authorities to issue a certificate compounding the cases pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, and prohibiting them from prosecuting the petitioner for any offence for the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83. Other reliefs have also been claimed. The case of the petitioner was that he received summons from the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, stating therein that proceedings have been initiated against him by the respondents for the above assessment years for commission of certain offences under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). It is stated by the petitioner that for the four assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declared in the original return 56,630 Income assessed after appeal effect: 1,12,650 Income sought to be concealed: 56,020 Amount of tax on it at 60 per cent. 33,612 Compounding fee payable: (at 100 per cent.) 33,612 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Assessment year: 1981-82: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Income declared in the original return: 26,270 Income assessed after appeal effect: 92,630 Income sought to be concealed: 66,410 Amount of tax on it calculated at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... because of his poor health. He, therefore, stated that he was ready and willing to pay the amount as per the communication vide annexure PB. He stated that he would deposit the amount as soon as intimation will be given to him. A communication dated June 16,1999, by the Income-tax Officer, Ward No. 4, Shimla, shows that against an amount of Rs.1,80,613, the petitioner was asked to pay an amount of Rs.2,03,158. It is not in dispute by and between the parties that the said amount had already been paid by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, thereafter, nothing was required to be done in the matter. Unfortunately, however, the authorities issued a communication on October 25, 2000 (impugned in the present petition at annexure PK). T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... initiated on that basis. In this connection, our attention has been invited by learned counsel for the petitioner to some of the decisions of the Supreme Court. The point had been elaborately dealt with in Joint Family of Udayan Chinu bhai v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 416, wherein the Supreme Court observed thus: "It is true that an assessment year under the income-tax Act is a self-contained assessment period and a decision in the assessment year does not ordinarily operate as res judicata in respect of the matter decided in any subsequent year, for the Assessing Officer is not a court and he is not precluded from arriving at a conclusion inconsistent, with his conclusion in another year. It is open to the Income-tax Officer, therefore, to d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw in a proceeding for assessment in one year binding in another year. The assessment and, the facts found are conclusive only in the year of assessment; the findings on a question of fact may be good and cogent evidence in subsequent year, when the same question falls to be determined in another year, but they are not binding and conclusive. A similar view was taken in Sri Ramdas Motor Transport Ltd. v. Tadi Adhinarayana Reddy [1997] 90 Comp Cas 383 (SC). It is no doubt true that if a question of law has been decided independent of the assessment year such as, the constitutional validity or vires of an Act, such a decision would operate as res judicata even in future litigation and cannot be challenged (vide Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the argument. Firstly, the said communication does not expressly or specifically state that an assessment year will not be taken as an independent unit. But even otherwise, in our considered opinion, in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in several cases, for the purpose of considering the provisions of the Act, each assessment year has to be considered as an independent unit for the purpose of payment of tax. If so, obviously, the guidelines dated October 20, 1995, would not apply to the cases on hand, inasmuch as, in none of the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83, the concealed amount, reached Rs.1 lakh. The petitions, hence, deserve to be allowed. Alternatively, it was submitted that even if two i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
