TMI Blog1930 (11) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of the district in June 1927 and again in July 1927. On 10 December 1927, the Commissioner purported to appoint Mr. P.L. Bhattacharjee, Special Income-tax Officer to deal with what he conceived to be a class of cases which would include the present case. The order was that he was to: perform all the functions of an Income-tax Officer in respect of those persons in Calcutta whose cases may be made over to him by me from time to time. ( 2. ) It has subsequently been held in , that that order was not within the power of the Commissioner upon a true construction of the Income-tax Act, and the consequence is that Mr. Bhattacharjee obtained under the Act no power to impose assessment upon these assessees or to deal with their case as an Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch as the case of the assessees and that all his acts ware null and void. That being so, on 25 September 1929, the Income-tax Officer of the district who had jurisdiction over the assessees from the beginning and whose jurisdiction never terminated by the illegal order of the Commissioner issued a reminder calling again upon the assessees to file a return. It appears that this time the assessees filed a return on 21 October 1929 but did so under protest. In December of that year, they further produced their books of account and, on 20 January 1930, an assessment was made by the Income-tax Officer of the district under Sub-section (3), Section 23, that is, in the ordinary course and not as an assessment against the asses-sees on the footing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in August 1929 that the proceedings before the Special Officer were nugatory the position then was that a valid notice having been issued in April 1927 that notice had not yet proceeded to a final assessment and nothing had happened which entitled the assessees to say that the income-tax authorities might no longer rely upon that notice. In my judgment, the position is that the proceedings for assessment were taking a dilatory course having regard to the mistake made about the meaning of Section 5, Income-tax Act, in the Commissioner's order of December 1927. The proceedings are still pending and, in my judgment, the question put to us should be answered in the affirmative and the in-coma-tax authorities should have their costs of this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
