9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (5) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loans from five several persons aggregating Rs. 85,000. In 1957, the original assessment of the 16th January, 1952, was reopened by a notice under section 34(1)(a) of the Act of 1922. The petitioner was called upon to prove the genuineness of these loans. Affidavits affirmed by the said five persons were filed before the Income-tax Officer stating that they had made advances to the partnership firm, namely, the petitioner, but the Income-tax Officer in his fresh assessment order under section 23(3)/34 added the loan of Rs. 85,000 as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner by his order made on the 7th October, 1964, held t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... withdrawn. But, on the 24th March, 1965, another notice was issued to the petitioner under section 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961. It appears from paragraph 8 of the affidavit-in-opposition of Monoranjan Ghosh affirmed on the 27th July, 1965, that before the notice was issued permission was sought from the Central Board of Direct Taxes to initiate proceedings under section 147(a) of the 1961 Act. Since the notice under challenge is a notice under section 148 read with section 147(a) the department's case obviously is that the Income-tax Officer has reason to believe that, by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment, income chargeable to tax h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 35 of the 1922 Act to rectify the mistake ; nor was any reference to the High Court sought against the order of the Appellate Tribunal. Thereafter, the Income-tax Officer initiated fresh reassessment proceedings under section 34 with respect to the interest income and made a fresh reassessment order for the assessment year 1942-43 to include that income. The Supreme Court has held that as the order of the Appellate Tribunal became final the finding of the Tribunal, even though by mistake, that the officer could not initiate reassessment proceedings in respect of the interest income also, was binding on the Income-tax Officer and he could not reopen the assessment over again to include the interest income. Mr. Bachawat, learned counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... compel the attendance of the lenders. There was no response on the part of the petitioner to this notice and respondent No. 1 came to the conclusion that these alleged creditors would not appear before the tax authorities if called upon to do so. This is a new information or material, according to Mr. Bachawat, which the Income-tax Officer did not have when the Appellate Assistant Commissioner made his order. Mr. Bachawat has also produced before me the report which respondent No.1 sent to the Commissioner of Income-tax to obtain his sanction to the issue of notice under section 148 for initiation of proceedings under section 147(a) of the Act of 1961. This report has been seen in court by counsel for the petitioner as well. In this report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
