TMI Blog1964 (8) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n on oath about the fact which the appellant knows to be true. It is thus clear that the main object which the appellant had in mind in moving this court under article 136 was to gain time. That is why at the final hearing, not even an attempt was made to raise any question about the jurisdiction of respondent No. 1 or the validity of the law under which he is proceeding against the appellant. Appeal dismissed with cost. - - - - - Dated:- 5-8-1964 - Judge(s) : P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR., K. N. WANCHOO., M. HIDAYATULLAH., J. C. SHAH., N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR C.J.----This appeal by special leave arises out of a writ petition filed by the appellant, Lalji Haridas, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant on the 20th December, 1957, under section 46(1)(a) of the Saurashtra Income-tax Ordinance, 1949. This section corresponds to section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act. It appears that respondent No. 1 came to know that for the assessment year 1949-50, a large amount of income received by the appellant had escaped assessment. That is why notice was issued against him calling upon him to make a return of his income for the relevant year. The appellant thereupon made a return showing an income of Rs. 46 for the year in question. Respondent No. 1 had come to know that several amounts had been credited in the account books of the appellant and appeared to represent his income. On the 24th October, 1948, for instance, two sums of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etermined to adopt dilatory proceedings and delay as much as he can the final disposal of the proceedings taken against him. After the matter was thus remanded to respondent No. 1, the appellant was required by two letters dated 13th April, 1960, and 7th July, 1960, to appear before respondent No. 1 and give his evidence. Instead of complying with the requisition contained in the said letters, the appellant moved the Gujarat High Court on the 9th July, 1960, by his present writ petition. It appears that he also preferred an appeal from the remand order to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The High Court summarily rejected the writ petition filed by the appellant, and it is against this summary dismissal that the appellant has come to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred by time. That is a matter which the income-tax authorities must consider on the merits in the light of the relevant evidence. Apart from this aspect of the matter, however, the plea of limitation sought to be raised by Mr. Pathak was not even specifically made as it should have been in the writ petition filed before the High Court. One of the grounds taken in the writ petition was that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had " instead of treating the assessment order a nullity and having the same set aside, illegally remanded the case back to the Income-tax Officer to save limitation ". It would be noticed that at its highest, this ground can mean that the result of the remand order was to attempt to save limitation ; it has no rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
