TMI Blog1961 (4) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for 1956-57, and demand notices under section 29 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, were issued to him. The petitioner then appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Kozhikode, and by the orders in appeal the tax for 1953-54, 1954-55 and 1955-56 were reduced, for 1953-54, to ₹ 1,513-2-0, for 1954-55 to ₹ 3,458-0-0 and for 1955-56 to ₹ 847-15-0. There was no reduction of the tax for 1956-57. Exhibit A, the order impugned before us, was subsequent to the dates of the orders in appeal. Fresh demand notices were not issued after the orders in appeal and the contention of the petitioner is that in the absence of such notices he cannot be considered as a defaulter within the meaning of section 45 of the Indian Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivision Bench for decision mentions two cases as supporting the position taken up by the assessee: Metropolitan Structural Works Ltd. v. Union of India [1955] 28 ITR 432 and Seghu Buchiah Setty v. Income-tax Officer, Kolar Circle [1960] 38 ITR 204 . The former is a decision of the High Court of Calcutta and the latter of the High Court of Mysore. According to Seghu Buchiah Setty 's case (supra) the Calcutta decision is an authority for the proposition that the department was not entitled to treat an assessee as a defaulter in the absence of a fresh notice of demand after the Appellate Assistant Commissioner reduced the tax payable by him. The Calcutta decision was understood in the same way by Bose J. of the Calcutta High Court in an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Officer, Madras [1958] 33 ITR 22 , 25, Rajagopalan J. of the Madras High Court had to deal with a similar question. The point for determination was whether a certificate forwarded by the Income-tax Officer to the Collector under section 46(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, should be treated as non est in law when the amount of tax due from the assessee was reduced in appeal. The learned judge said: The amount was reduced by the order of the Commissioner dated 7th January, 1954. Of course it is only the amount as finally revised by the Commissioner, ₹ 47,229-5-0, that can be lawfully collected from the assessee. The question however is whether that sum can be collected now on the basis of the certificate issued on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fresh notice of demand is not necessary where the demand or penalty is reduced as a result of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Appellate Tribunal or the Commissioner. It has been represented to the Board that a person in whose case a reduction has been made must know the final amount due from him as a result of the reduction. It has, therefore, been decided by the Board that in such a case a copy of the computation of the reduction of tax in Form I.T. 15A should be issued to the assessee to enable him to check the amount of reduction made and refund, if any, allowed to him in consequence thereof. The same procedure be followed where a reduction is due to an order under section 35 of the Act. (See Income- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
