ITO, Calcutta and others Vs. Kamal Singh Rampuria
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal no. 6115 of 1983
Petitioner: ITO, Calcutta and others
Respondent: Kamal Singh Rampuria
Apeal: Civil Appeal no. 6115 of 1983
Judges: K.S. Karippornan & S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Apr 02, 1997
Head Note:
INCOME TAX
Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 148, 147 – ~4~ Notice under Section 148 – Validity – All relevant material produced by the assessee during original assessment – High Court holding that respondent cannot be served notice since all primary or material facts were placed before the ITO. Held finding unassailable. Notice not sustain-able. The finding of the Division Bench that all primary or material facts were placed before the officer during the original assessment and that there has been no failure on the part of the respondent to disclose material facts is unassailable. Notice issued to respondent/assessee under Section 147 of the Act cannot be sustained. (Para 3)
Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 148, 147 – ~4~ Notice under Section 148 – Validity – All relevant material produced by the assessee during original assessment – High Court holding that respondent cannot be served notice since all primary or material facts were placed before the ITO. Held finding unassailable. Notice not sustain-able. The finding of the Division Bench that all primary or material facts were placed before the officer during the original assessment and that there has been no failure on the part of the respondent to disclose material facts is unassailable. Notice issued to respondent/assessee under Section 147 of the Act cannot be sustained. (Para 3)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The respondent was assessed by the Income Tax authorities. He was served with a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 28-4-1972 for the Assessment Year 1959-60. The sole plea of the re-spondent was that there was no basis or jurisdiction to issue such a notice. The learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court declined to accept the plea of the respondent. In appeal, the Division Bench, after elaborate consideration of the matter held that the record will show that all relevant materials were produced by the assessee during the original assessment and there has been no failure on his part to disclose primary or material facts for effecting the assessment. On this basis, the Division Bench held that the proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act were unsustainable and without jurisdiction.
2. Heard counsel and perused the relevant records.
3. We are of the view that the finding of the Division Bench that all primary or material facts were placed before the officer during the original assessment is unassailable. In such circum-stances, notice issued to the respondent/assessee under Section 147 of the Act cannot be sustained. The Division Bench was, therefore, right in its reasoning and conclusion, to hold in favour of the respondent (assessee). We decline to interfere in this appeal.
The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The respondent was assessed by the Income Tax authorities. He was served with a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 28-4-1972 for the Assessment Year 1959-60. The sole plea of the re-spondent was that there was no basis or jurisdiction to issue such a notice. The learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court declined to accept the plea of the respondent. In appeal, the Division Bench, after elaborate consideration of the matter held that the record will show that all relevant materials were produced by the assessee during the original assessment and there has been no failure on his part to disclose primary or material facts for effecting the assessment. On this basis, the Division Bench held that the proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act were unsustainable and without jurisdiction.
2. Heard counsel and perused the relevant records.
3. We are of the view that the finding of the Division Bench that all primary or material facts were placed before the officer during the original assessment is unassailable. In such circum-stances, notice issued to the respondent/assessee under Section 147 of the Act cannot be sustained. The Division Bench was, therefore, right in its reasoning and conclusion, to hold in favour of the respondent (assessee). We decline to interfere in this appeal.
The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
