1989 (4) TMI 9 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of Family Court to summon records from Income-tax Department.
2. Maintainability of the writ petition without exhausting remedy under section 138(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
3. Impleadment of parties in the writ petition.

Analysis:
1. Jurisdiction of Family Court: The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to produce documents for a case pending in the Family Court. The Income-tax Department contended that the Family Court lacked jurisdiction to issue such summons. The court held that under Section 10 of the Family Courts Act, the Family Court is deemed a civil court with powers under the Code of Civil Procedure. The court opined that the Income-tax Department's stand before the Family Court was not sustainable, directing the Family Court to decide whether the Department should produce the records for the case.

2. Maintainability of Writ Petition: The Income-tax Department argued that the writ petition was not maintainable as the petitioner should first exhaust the remedy under section 138(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court agreed that the petitioner must exhaust this remedy but disagreed with the Department's stance on the Family Court's jurisdiction. The court directed the Family Court to decide on the issue of summoning records before proceeding with the case, emphasizing that the petitioner should implead his mother-in-law in the Family Court proceedings.

3. Impleadment of Parties: The court noted that the petitioner's mother-in-law was not impleaded in the writ petition, which could be fatal to the case. It directed the petitioner to implead her in the Family Court proceedings. Additionally, the court instructed the Family Court to allow the counsel for the Income-tax Department to make submissions on the issue after issuing notice. The court emphasized the need for a prompt resolution of the matter, directing the Family Court to pass orders promptly.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the writ petition but directed the Family Court to decide on the request to summon records from the Income-tax Department before making any final decisions in the case.