TMI Blog1962 (2) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,800 in his business of broking and another sum of ₹ 2,000 from other sources because of the fact that he had encashed two one thousand rupee notes for the possession of which he failed to give any satisfactory explanation. This assessment was made on March 22, 1949. Thereafter, the Income-tax Officer came to know that the assessee held a money-lender's licence and had a money-lending business which he had failed to disclose. On July 6, 1954, a notice under section 34 of the Income-tax Act was issued on the assessee by the Income-tax Officer stating that he had reason to believe that the assessee's income assessable to income-tax for the assessment year 1946-47 had escaped assessment and it was, therefore, proposed to reassess the said income escaping assessment. On September 10, 1954, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice under section 22 (4) for the assessment year 1946-47 (2002 Dewali) pursuant to notice under section 34 calling upon the assessee to produce his books of account along with the books for the year 2002 Dewali and bank pass books. On June 27, 1955, the assessee filed a duly verified list of debtors against some of whom he had filed suits while oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in any other case at any time within four years of the end of that year, serve on the person liable to pay tax on such income, profits or gains a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under subsection (2) of section 22, and may proceed to assess or reassess such income, profits or gains, and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if the notice were a notice issued under that sub-section. Under section 22(4) the Income-tax Officer may serve ... on any person who has made a return under sub-section (1) or upon whom a notice has been served under sub-section (2) a notice requiring him, on a date to be therein specified, to produce...such accounts or documents as the Income-tax Officer may require. Further, under sub-section (2) of section 22 in the case of any person whose total income is, in the Income-tax Officer's opinion, of such an amount as to render such person liable to income-tax, the Income-tax Officer may serve a notice upon him requiring him to furnish, within such period, not being less than thirty days, as may be specified in the notice, a return in the prescribed form and verified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n March 24, 1954, a notice was issued-under section 34 upon the petitioner stating that he had been under-assessed for the year ending March 31, 1946, and directing him to file a return of total income for the year ending on that date. The petitioner thereupon filed a return but contended that the amount above-mentioned was not income or dividend and was not liable to payment of income-tax. On January 31, 1955, the Income-tax Officer made the assessment order whereby the total income of the petitioner was reassessed at ₹ 70,808. On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that since he had declared his year of calculation to be from May to April 30 following, the above income from the company would fall within other sources and the year of assessment therefor would not be the financial year but the year declared by the assessee. This was negatived by the learned judge who said that until the assessee declared his option with regard to the separate source of income the ordinary financial year would be applicable to his case. A similar view was taken by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. P. Darolia Sons [1955] 27 ITR 515 . In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The High Court went on to observe that there was no presumption in such a case that the cash receipt was income of the same business for which the assessee kept regular books of account. According to the High Court, the question was really a question of fact to be decided upon the materials furnished in each particular case. The High Court further held that in respect of the amount of ₹ 15,000 there was no account maintained by the assessee and no option exercised on his part as to the year of accounting and in the absence of any such system of accounting as also in the absence of the exercise of any option on his part the only course open to the. income-tax authorities was to take the financial year ending on March 31, 1946, as the previous year for the amount of ₹ 15,000. I do not think that the argument that the income-tax authorities could only assess the income which fell within Dewali year 2002 in terms of the notice issued under section 34 has any force. Under section 22(1) the Income-tax Officer has to give notice by publication on or before May 1 in each calendar year requiring every person whose total income during the previous year exceeded the maximum am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
