9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . P. No. 918 of 2000, as in both these petitions, a common question of law is involved. The facts in brief that led to the filing of the writ need mention. The petitioner is an assessee within the meaning of section 2(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. He is being assessed as an individual. He is engaged in the business of jewellery and money-lending. That for the assessment years 1986-87, 1988 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a consequence of the appellate orders. By letter dated june 28, 1999 (annexure P-13), the Assessing Officer declined to refund the amount to the petitioner on the ground that since the Department has to recover a total outstanding of Rs. 37,49,406 from the deceased father of the petitioner for the assessment years 1982-83 to 1990-91 and since, the petitioner has become or in other words is a leg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered opinion, the Assessing Officer was not right in adjusting the refund amount payable to the petitioner against the outstanding dues of his late father by relying on section 159(4) of the Act. The refund which has become payable to the petitioner is out of his personal case having no connection or/and nexus with that of the case of his late father. It is not the case of the Department that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the outstanding dues of the late father of the petitioner out of the assets belonging to the late father which by virtue of law of inheritance or by testamentary succession have gone in the bands of the petitioner, i.e., son. As held supra, neither in it the case of Department nor were efforts made to show that the refund which the petitioner is claiming belongs to his father. On the other bare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
