9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (12) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Circle I, Delhi. The High Court of Delhi allowed those writ petitions and quashed the impugned notices. Hence these appeals. The assessee in these cases is a Hindu undivided family. The assessment years with which we are concerned in 'these appeals range from 1942-43 to 1953-54. The assessee filed its returns for these years in due time. The assessee's account books showed considerable cash credits in the name of the brothers-in-law of the second respondent, the karta of the Hindu undivided family. These alleged creditors were living in Nepal. The account books also showed certain credit entries in the name of Rana Anand Nar Singh, alleged to be in connection with expenses incurred by him for getting trees cut on behalf of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at it is a fit case for the issue of the notice. The recording of the reasons in support of the belief formed by the Income tax Officer and the satisfaction of the Central Board of Revenue on the basis of the reasons recorded by the Income-tax Officer that it is a fit case for issue of notice under section 34(1)(a) are extremely important circumstances to find out whether the Income-tax Officer bad jurisdiction to proceed under section 34(1)(a). In Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Companies, District , Calcutta, this Court laid down (1) that to confer jurisdiction under section 34 to issue notice in respect of assessments beyond the period of four years, but within a period of eight years, from the end of the relevant yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and that it is not permissible for it to act mechanically. The same view was again taken by this court in Sheo Nath Singh, v. Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. In the instant case, the assessee alleged in his writ petitions that there was no relevant material before the Income-tax Officer before he issued notices under section 34(1)(a) on the basis of which he could have had reason to believe that any income had escaped assessment. In the writ petitions the assessee called upon the Income-tax Officer to produce the report made by him to the Central Board of Revenue as well as the order of the Central Board of Revenue thereon. Despite this prayer, neither the Union of India nor the Income-tax Officer cared to produce the rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
