TMI Blog1959 (4) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and 1954-55 were passed by the Income-tax Officer against the petitioner under section 23(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act fixing up his assessable income for the assessment year 1953-54 at ₹ 61,000 and demanding a tax of ₹ 19,808-1-0 and an assessable income of ₹ 1,21,000 for the assessment year 1954-55 and demanding a tax of ₹ 66,601-3-0. The petitioner presented two separate applications to the Income-tax Officer, Kolar, under section 27 of the Indian Income-tax Act requesting him to cancel the assessments and to proceed to make fresh assessments. The applications were rejected on the ground that there was no sufficient cause for non-compliance with the notice under section 22(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cover the tax due. After the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax passed the orders reducing the taxable income of the petitioner and also the tax due by the petitioner for the two years, a letter was addressed by the Income-tax Officer, Kolar Circle, on 14th February, 1956, intimating that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax had fixed up his liability to income-tax for the years 1953-54 and 1954-55 at ₹ 4,215-9-0 and ₹ 13,346-8-0 respectively and that he should pay the amount at once into the local treasury and intimate that fact to the office failing which heavy penalty will be imposed. The Collector of Kolar District proceeded to bring the immoveable properties of the petitioner for sale that had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovided for the issue of a notice of demand did not provide either expressly or by implication that upon an assessment being revised either by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, a fresh notice of demand could be issued. In the course of his argument he modified the contention to a certain extent and submitted in the end that although there might not be any prohibition in section 29 against issuing a fresh notice of demand after an assessment had been revised it was not necessary that such a fresh notice should be issued. I may say at once that if the last be the contention of Mr. Roy, his client must obviously fail, because if the third notice of demand, as issued in the present case, is not prohib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noticeable that the section does not say 'in consequence of any assessment order' but says 'in consequence of any order'. Such order is an order 'passed under or in pursuance of this Act' and it can hardly be disputed that an order passed by an Appellate Assistant Commissioner or an order passed by an Appellate Tribunal is also an order passed under or in pursuance of the Income-tax Act. If so, when there is some tax due in consequence of an order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or in consequence of an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, a clear occasion arises under the words of the section to serve a notice of demand upon the assessee. That such fresh notice should be issued when the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
