9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (9) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate the controversy raised in this petition, the following undisputed facts deserve to be noticed. Respondent-assessee's land measuring 192 kanals and 2 marlas was acquired by the State Government in pursuance of a notification published under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on January 30, 1973, and they were dispossessed thereof on October 5, 1973, after the pronouncement of the award under section 11 of the said Act, The assessees sought reference under section 18 of the Act against that award and as a result of the same, the Additional District judge, Hissar, vide his judgment dated January 23, 1979, enhanced the amount of compensation to a considerable extent. The respondents have concededly received this compensation inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 983, referred to above, set those assessments aside with the direction that the Income-tax Officer should not take a final decision in the matter till the said litigation in the civil court was finalised. Since the Income-tax Officer, Hissar, issued notices to the plaintiffs to file their returns for the assessment years 1975-76 to 1981-82, they filed the present suit alleging in the light of the above-noted facts that the said officer had no jurisdiction in the matter and he should be restrained from proceeding against them under the Income-tax Act. This stand of the plaintiff-respondents has been contested by the Revenue on a number of pleas including the one that the civil court had no jurisdiction in the matter in view of the provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Shri Kashmir Singh Bhullar [1984] 150 ITR 578 (section 67 of the Income-tax Act referred to in the earlier case is in pari materia with section 293 mentioned in the later case), yet in order to elucidate his submission, he makes a reference to a Division Bench judgment of the Patna High Court in Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. Union of India [1964] 51 ITR 596, wherein it has been observed (at p. 612) that the last words " or intended to be done " occurring in section 293 of the Income-tax Act " cannot apparently refer to a tortious act, because suit for damages in respect of a tortious act must relate to a past act and not to an unknown future act ". According to learned counsel, it will be ridiculous and illogical to suggest or to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer not to proceed with or finalise the assessments against the respondents till the finalisation of the adjudication about the validity of the acquisition proceedings, the issuance of the present notices by him not only amounts to violation of that direction but is even without jurisdiction. Again, even if this plea has some merit, the same has to be raised before the competent authority under the Act and this by itself does not confer any jurisdiction on the civil court to go into the legality or the validity of the action of the Income-tax Officer. Besides this, it is apparent from the impugned order of the civil court that the stand of the Income-tax Officer is that the direction by the Commissioner (Appeals) only related to the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
