9911796707
TMI Blog1963 (8) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessment year is 1946-1947. The assessment was reopened under section 34. The original assessment was on Chandrabhan Johurmull in the status of an individual. He died in May, 1949. On the security of a fixed deposit of ₹ 25,000 standing in the name of one Luchminarain Maheswari, the assessee, Chandrabhan Johurmull, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erstood the purpose for which the notice under section 34 was issued to him, and, in compliance with the notice, filed a return by showing himself to be the legal representative of his father. The Tribunal was of opinion that this was a case of waiver of the defect in the notice. It has taken note of the decision of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramsukh Motilal [1955] 27 I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l was bound to follow the decision of this court. But the controversy has now been set at rest by the observations of the Supreme Court in Y. Narayana Chetty v. Income-tax Officer, Nellore [1959] 35 ITR 388 ; [1959] Supp. 1 SCR 189. At page 392, Gajendra-gadkar J. states as follows : "The argument is that the service of the requisite notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear observations by the Supreme Court, I do not think there is any scope for any further argument in this matter. The notice which was issued and served in the instant case was obviously invalid and the proceedings before the Income-tax Officer were, consequently, illegal and void. The service of notice on the assessee was a condition precedent to the assumption of jurisdiction by the Income-tax O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
