Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2008 (4) TMI 161

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Department. JUDGMENT VIKRAM NATH J.— The relevant facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition are that the petitioner had won a lottery of Rs. 2,00,000, result of which was declared on January 22, 1992, under the scheme "Sahara Golden Key" run by the Sahara India. The prize money was paid to the petitioner in February, 1992, i.e., Before March 31, 1992, which would mean the financial year 1991-92 and the assessment year 1992-93. The petitioner in her return for the assessment year 1992-93 disclosed the receipt of the prize money and also paid the tax due on it. The assessment order for the assessment year 1992-93 was passed on March 20, 2002. 2. It appears that the Assessing Officer, on some misconception thought .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 154 of the Act for rectification of the mistake in the order of the Commissioner but the same was also rejected. It is against these orders the present writ petition has been filed. 4. Heard Sri S. D. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri A. N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel representing the Department of Income-tax. 5. From a perusal of the order passed by the Commissioner dismissing the revision relating to penalty on the ground of delay, it is apparent that according to the Commissioner limitation for filing the revision was expiring on August 30, 2000, whereas the revision was filed on November 8, 2000. The delay would be approximately 70 days according to the Commissioner. However, the Commissioner in his orde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... account payee cheque dated January 22, 1992, and credited to her account in the month of February, 1992. Further, in paragraph No. 8 the petitioner has specifically averred that she had not earned any income whatsoever, what to say of the prize money in the previous year 1991-92. The Department in its reply to paragraph No. 6 of the writ petition, has admitted in paragraph No. 7 of the counter-affidavit that the prize money related to the accounting year 1991-92, assessment year 1992-93 and not to the assessment year 1991-92. 8. The facts as stated in paragraphs Nos. 6, 7 and 8 of the writ petition and the reply as given in paragraphs Nos. 7, 8, 9 of the counter-affidavit are reproduced herein under "6. That, the lottery operator, Sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er has escaped assessment and after receiving the approval from the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, a notice under section 148 in respect of the assessment year 1992-93 was issued to tax the prize money of Rs. 2,00,000 received by the petitioner. 8. That the contents of paragraph No. 7 of the writ petition need no reply being matter of record. 9. That in reply to the contents of paragraph No. 8 of the writ petition it is submitted that despite the issue of notice under section 148 in respect of the assessment year 1991-92 no return was ever filed despite the fact that the notice dated September 20, 1994, was served on the husband of the petitioner Dr. C. M. Mishra on January 24, 1997." 10. From the above it is apparent that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sessment and penalty proceedings for the assessment year 1991-92 cannot be sustained. Further, as there has been no intention of either avoiding or evading payment of tax by the petitioner no purpose will be served by remanding the matter for a fresh round of litigation to the revisional authority. Therefore, this court in writ jurisdiction having ample power for correcting an illegality apparent on the face of the record is finally adjudicating the issue which has come before it in the writ jurisdiction. Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Indore, in Cr. Case No. 10/1989 acquitting the present respondent for offences punishable under sections 276CC and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for shore "the Act"), are before this court wit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates