9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Request for certified copy of combined order in Income-tax Appeals, refusal by first respondent, prayer for direction to receive request and dispose of application, dispute over management of properties, violation of agreement by respondent No. 4, application for direction to produce documents dismissed, rejection of request by first and third respondents, appeal to Commissioner of Income-tax, prayer for summoning Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, rejection of application by Subordinate Judge's Court, prayer for quashing order and direction to entertain application, objections by respondent No. 4, contentions regarding necessity of documents, interpretation of section 138(1)(b) of Income-tax Act, prayer for certified copy of order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), clarification of law by Supreme Court, consideration of public interest in furnishing information, lack of reasons for rejection of application by first respondent, petitioner's interest in common property, entitlement to copy of appellate orders in Income-tax Appeals. Analysis: The petitioner approached the High Court seeking to quash the order passed by the first respondent, which refused his request for a certified copy of the combined order in Income-tax Appeals against his brother, respondent No. 4. The petitioner and respondent No. 4 are brothers who had an agreement regarding the management of certain properties, leading to a dispute over the existence of a wakf in relation to the properties. The petitioner alleged that respondent No. 4 violated the agreement, necessitating legal action to restrain him from interfering with the property. The petitioner's request for documents related to the income-tax assessments against respondent No. 4 was initially dismissed by the court, citing restrictions under section 138 of the Income-tax Act. Subsequent rejections by various authorities led to the petitioner's appeal to the High Court. The High Court considered the petitioner's prayer for a certified copy of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) regarding assessments against respondent No. 4. The court referred to a Supreme Court decision clarifying the scope of section 138(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the need for public interest in furnishing information. The first respondent's rejection of the petitioner's application lacked reasons and failed to consider the petitioner's interest in the common property. The court highlighted the petitioner's ownership stake in the property and the relevance of the income-tax assessments to the dispute. It directed the first respondent to reconsider the petitioner's application for copies of the appellate orders, providing an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. The court clarified that the reconsideration was limited to the issue of copies of specific orders and did not extend to other documents. In conclusion, the High Court allowed the original petition to the extent of quashing the order related to the petitioner's request for copies of specific appellate orders and directed the first respondent to reconsider the application in light of relevant provisions of the law and after giving the petitioner a chance to present his case. The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner's rights and interests in the context of the ongoing legal dispute over the management of the properties.
|
