9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (1) TMI 5X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch, 1969. Thereafter, it appears that on the 15th March, 1973, a notice was issued which was to the following effect: "Subject : Cancellation of registration u/s. 186 of the I.T. Act, 1961 -- For asst. years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. This is to give you notice that after enquiry it is gathered that there was no genuine firm in existence during the above-mentioned assessment years as one of the partners, Sri Nandram Jhunjhunwalla, is found to be a non-existing person. Under the circumstances, you are requested to show cause by 23-3-1973 why registration of the firm should not be cancelled for the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67 ?" The assessee replied to the said notice which is as follows: "In reply I have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner has in possession to rebut the tentative conclusion of the Income-tax Officer. The petitioner has also not stated why he wanted longer time. In the premises, I am unable to accept this contention that no reasonable opportunity had been given to the petitioner. It was, secondly, contended that the notice issued indicated that there was a pre-determined mind. It was submitted that the Income-tax Officer had already come to the conclusion that Nandram Jhunjhunwalla, a person alleged to be a partner of the firm, was a non-existent person. Therefore, the notice did not give reasonable opportunity. I am also unable to accept this contention. The information indicated what was gathered by the Income-tax Officer and thereupon he gave the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer had acted erroneously in holding that Nandram Jhunjhunwalla was a non-existent person. It. was contended that he had been produced at the time of the original registration. He had not appeared in pursuance of the summons under section 131 of the Income- tax Act, 1961. The circumstances under which a person alleged to be Nandram Jhunjhunwalla appeared before the Income-tax Officer, "B" Ward, Dist. V(1), on the 7th March, 1969, had been explained in the affidavit-in-opposition of Saibal Kumar Dasgupta affirmed on the 4th September, 1973, in answer to the rule nisi. The circumstances revealed that whenever attempts had been made to contact Nandram by post or otherwise independently by the revenue, these attempts had always failed, but som ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
