9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (7) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4221 of 1989. In Writ Petition No. 4220 of 1989 the petitioners have prayed for a writ of prohibition prohibiting the first respondent from taking any proceedings against the petitioner in respect of arrears under the Income-tax Act, 1961, or the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, of Venkata Naicken Trust, Randalls Road, Madras-7, in respect of the assessment alleged to have been completed on the Venkata Naicken Trust by the first respondent. The first petitioner is a trust and the second petitioner is one Gouthaman, great grand-son of the late Mandy Venkata Naicker, who created the trust known as Venkata Naicken Trust, It is stated that notices dated August 23, 1981 and February 1, 1988, containing demands of taxes and penalties levied on Venkata N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, dated March 18, 1988, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that having accepted the case of the petitioners for the assessment years 1954-55 to 1963-64, 1965-66 to 1970-71, he committed an error in rejecting the similar claim made for the assessment years 1964-65, 1971-72, 1972-73, 1973-74, 1975-76 and 1976-77. She has also contended that the Commissioner has committed an error in shifting the burden on the assessees with regard to service of notice. Learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue, after taking me through the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax has contended that there is no order imposing penalty against the petitioners. However, in the light of the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue has stated that no penalty proceedings were initiated against the petitioners. Ili the absence of particulars in the impugned order coupled with the absence of records from the Revenue, I am constrained to accept the argument of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and consequently quash the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax dated March 18, 1988, and remit the matter to him for fresh disposal. The net result is, Writ Petition No. 4221 of 1989 is allowed, the order of the second respondent-Commissioner of Income-tax, dated March 18, 1988, is quashed and the matter is remitted to the said authority for fresh disposal in relation to the assessment years 1964-65, 1971-72, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
