TMI Blog1954 (10) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . J.--The petitioner in this case is a resident of Poona in the State of Bombay. He carries on business there and also holds property in the city of Bombay. During the eight years beginning with 1940-41 and ending with 1947-48 he was assessed on a total income of Rs. 9,75,265. The Central Government, thinking that he had evaded payment of tax and had concealed substantial profits, in the year 1948 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the Income-tax Officer to enforce payment of the evaded tax according to the terms and conditions of the settlement. The petitioner once again requested that the amount due be received from him by easy instalments of Rs. 25,000 each. The Government of India, by its order dated the 28th July, 1952, agreed to recover the amount due in three instalments, i.e., Rs. 50,000 by 1st March, 1954, Rs. 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s misconceived. As pointed out therein, the liability of the petitioner to pay evaded tax arises now under the settlement voluntarily entered into by him with the Central Government and such a settlement cannot be questioned by preferring a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. The result is that this petition fails and is dismissed with costs. Petition dismissed. - - TaxTMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
