TMI Blog1975 (3) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed voluntary returns of income for the assessment years 1969-70 to 1973-74 declaring an income of Rs. 31,500 stating that it was her previous savings inclusive of the gifts given to her at the time of her marriage. She was not assessed to tax previously. Along with the returns of income she filed a letter dated October 20, 1972, which reads as follows : With reference to the above, I beg to request you that out of my previous savings I am now having cash of Rs. 31,500 with me and that I may be assessed as under: Y. E. Asst. Year : Rs. 21-10-68 69-70 7,500 9-11-69 70-71 7,800 30-10-70 71-72 8,000 19-10-71 72-73 8,200 ------------ 31,500 ------------ and have enclosed Form No. 3 for all the above 4 years. I have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r objection raising various contentions. After hearing the petitioner and considering her contentions, the Commissioner formed prima facie opinion that the returns filed by the assessee did not disclose her circulating capital for any of the five years and there was no evidence that she was engaged in the money-lending business. He further observed thus : " Any Income-tax Officer who does his duties diligently would have sat up, on reading the assessee's letter and seeing the assessee's returns and would have made elementary enquiries to satisfy himself that there was a business done by the assessee and there was income earned from it as alleged. That he did not do so and misdirected himself in accepting the returns under section 143(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he orders challenged in all these petitions were made by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Act, and are appealable to the Tribunal under section 253(l)(c) of the Act. The Act provides a complete and self-contained machinery for obtaining relief against improper action taken by the departmental authorities and normally a party who is aggrieved by such action should have recourse to that machinery. It is only where the action complained of is, on the face of it, erroneous for want of jurisdiction or impairs the fundamental right of a person, this court entertains a petition under article 226 and not otherwise. I do not think that the case on hand falls within any one of these principles. However, I proceed now to examine the validity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) that the order proposed to be revised is erroneous ; and (2) that such order has resulted in prejudice to the interests of the revenue. The satisfaction of these two conditions is essential for setting aside the order proposed to be revised." Relying on the above decision, Mr. Srinivasan, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the assessments revised by the Commissioner could not be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, and, therefore, he was in error in setting aside the said orders. I cannot accept the contention. In all these cases the assessments were made in undue haste and without any enquiry or evidence. The petitioners were all new assessees filing returns without any accompanyi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amendment to section 143 of the Act, the assessments in question though made without any enquiry or evidence, cannot, in any event be said to be erroneous, though it might be prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, since the Income-tax Officer could accept any voluntary return without requiring the presence of the assessee or the production by him of any evidence in support of the return, and he need not be satisfied about the correctness of the source of income. Section 143(1)(a) as substituted by Act 42 of 1970 with effect from April 1, 1971, provides where a return has been made under section 139, the Income-tax Officer may, without requiring the presence of the assessee or the production by him of any evidence in support of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|