9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (3) TMI 347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt was delivered by MEHROTRA J.-We have heard Dr. Misra in support of this petition. The brief facts are these : petitioner No. 1 claims to be a registered partnership firm and it is stated that for the assessment year 1975-76, registration was granted, by the Income-tax Department under s. 185 of the I.T. Act. A true copy of the said order dated September 25, 1982, is annex to the writ petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said notice. Dr. Misra has contended that all the necessary facts were in possession of the Department when registration was granted to the assessee-firm on September 25, 1982, and in the instant case, the Department is merely seeking to cancel the registration on change of opinion which it is not entitled to do under s. 186(1). He has placed reliance on a number of authorities under s. 147 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 147). Under cl. (b), the expression is........ the Income-tax Officer has, in consequence of information in his possession, reason to believe ........ The entire case law under the said provision was rendered in reference to the said prerequisites. It is not necessary to notice all the cases which are relevant. However, a reference should be made to the Supreme Court pronouncement in Narayan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petition under art. 226 to pass an order creating complications for the assessee and for the Department. However, we feel that this is not a fit case where it can be said that the Department lacks jurisdiction to take proceedings under s. 186(1). In this view of the matter, this petition is dismissed in limine. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for a certificate of fitness under art. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
