9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmunicated vide letter dated 27.02.2006 issued by respondent No.2 (Annexure-Q). The petitioner, an individual, has income from business carried on by the family members of the petitioner along with the petitioner in Partnerships, and two Proprietary concerns. On 29.08.1980, proceedings under Section 131(1) of the Act were undertaken at the various business premises and various books of accounts, cash books, stock registers, etc. pertaining to business were seized by the Department. This was followed by proceedings under Section 132 of the Act on 27.08.1981. It is the case of the petitioner that various letters were issued by the petitioner and other family members seeking return of various documents and account books so as to enable filing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by respondent Department and the grievance of the petitioner in this regard is that because the return of income resulted in a refund likely to be made in favour of the petitioner, the said return has not been processed. It is further contended that the order impugned dated 27.02.2006 is merely a communication from Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-III, and respondent Board has not made any order, and if any order is made, the same has not been communicated to the petitioner. It is further submitted that said communication (Annexure-Q) cannot be termed to be an order in law in absence of any reasoning contained therein. That the petitioner was merely seeking processing of the return of income filed by the petitioner and no prejudi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns for preceding two years have been filed on 27.03.1984 and 30.3.1985 respectively, while the returns for Assessment Years 1984-85 and 1985-86 have been filed on 30.10.1986 and 30.01.1987. Thus, not only did the petitioner file returns for all the assessment years belatedly but for Assessment Year 1984-85, namely subsequent assessment year, return was filed prior to the return of income for the year under consideration namely Assessment Year 1983-84. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, if respondent authority did not find it desirable or expedient as a case of genuine hardship, it cannot be stated that the said order suffers from any legal infirmity. The contention that the impugned order does not contain any reasons, does not merit a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
