9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (5) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er prayed for a declaration that no interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of the Income-tax Act is leviable in the course of proceedings under section 147 of the Act. The impugned notice (annexure-1) was issued on January 22, 1996. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner, by his letter dated September 26, 1996, objected before the Income-tax Officer and stated that the notice issued was prima facie barred by limitation, and further that no basis or reasons have been stated in the notice for initiation of the proceedings in question. He also denied that he had received any income whatsoever in his name, or that his income whatsoever had escaped assessment for the aforesaid years. Without disposing of the objection of the petitioner, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s carried on thereafter belonged to the association of persons of the Hindu undivided families of three separated sons of Sri Suraj Choudhary including the petitioner herein. Since the association of persons was not before the Settlement Commission, but had earned substantial income during six years from 1981-82 to 1986-87, the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction was directed to take action as per law to bring this income to tax in the relevant assessment years. The submission urged on behalf of the Department is that it was pursuant to such direction that a notice was issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. We have perused the order of the Settlement Commission, and counsel for the Revenue made much of the concession said to have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to the assessee, or even in the file maintained by him in his office. Though a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Revenue, counsel for the Revenue conceded that there is no averment in the counter-affidavit that reasons have been separately recorded in the file. On this short ground alone the notice issued under section 148, which is annexure-1 to the writ petition, must be quashed. There is yet another reason why the notice (annexure-1) and the order passed consequent thereto, cannot be upheld. It was not disputed before us that so far as the assessment year 1981-82 is concerned, the period of limitation prescribed is ten years for the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The said period, therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision in the case of any other assessee, or in a proceeding in which the assessee in question is not a party. It was submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the Settlement Commission under section 245D of the Act is not within the contemplation of sub-section (1) of section 150 of the Act because it is not a proceeding by way of appeal, reference or revision nor is it a proceeding under any other law before a court. We need not go into this question because it is not necessary so to do. The assessee before the Settlement Commission was different and distinct from the assessee with which we are concerned in this case. Certain findings were arrived at by the Settlement Commission and that gave rise to a belief in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
