9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (6) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... toon, Nawabjadi Kamrunnessa Khatoon, Nawabjadi Badrunnessa Khatoon, the present petitioner herein, and Nawab Musharaff Hussain. This association of persons, according to the revenue, was assessed to tax for several years. Indeed, they were assessed to tax for 1952-53, 1961-62, 1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58, 1962-63 and 1966-67. I am, however, not concerned in this application under art. 226 of the Constitution with any attempt for recovery on account of the tax dues for the assessment years 1952-53 and 1961-62. In this application, under art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner challenges the recovery proceedings in respect of the assesssment years 1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58, 1962-63 and 1966-67. The main grievance of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1956-57 also, the position appears to be the same. For the assessment year 1957-59, the position appears to be the same and for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1966-67, the assessment orders were served on the 3rd May, 1975, and these were served by affixation on the refusal of the assessee to accept the service, or failure to find out the assessee. The original returns of the service of notice were produced before me. It appears, therefore, that there has been services of the notice of demand as required by the law before initiation of the proceedings for certificate. Learned advocate, for the petitioner, however, drew my attention to certain observations in the case of E. Alfred VI, First Addl. ITO [1957] 32 ITR 401 (Mad). He contended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bers of the association of persons as the persons from whom recovery should be made. Reliance, however, was placed by learned advocate on the observation of the Supreme Court in the case of First Addl. ITO v. Mrs. Suseela Sadanandan [1965] 57 ITR 168. That was, however, a different case and in view of the observation of the Supreme Court referred to hereinbefore, I am of the opinion, that in this case the certificate proceedings or recovery proceedings cannot be impugned on the ground that all the legal representatives of the deceased members of the association of persons had not been again served with the notice of demand. It was then contended that the ITO who had forwarded the certificates to the TRO was not the officer who had made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5, and for the year 1962-63, it was well within the time. In that view of the matter, the challenge to the certificate proceedings, in my opinion, made in this application under art. 226 of the Constitution cannot be sustained. There is, however, one aspect of the matter in respect of which, I think, justice of the case requires some direction. It appears that on 19th November, 1975, before initiating the proceeding, the petitioner was written to by the ITO. The case of the petitioner in para. 9 of the petition is that the petitioner received the letter on 8th December, 1975. I have nothing on record to believe or accept the petitioner's statement. But, giving her the benefit of doubt, in my opinion, the justice of the situation would be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
