Wanchoo, C. J.—This is an application by Ramniranjan Kedia under Art. 226 of the Constitution in an income-tax matter.

2. Though the application is a long one running into 44 paragraphs, the brief and salient facts on which it is based are these—

A notice was issued to the applicant under sec. 34(1) of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter called the Act) on the 27th of March, 1954, by the Income-tax Officer, Ajmer, in connection with the assessment year 1945-46, apparently on the ground that certain income had escaped assessment. The applicant appeared before the Income-tax Officer, and objected to the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to assess him under that section. The case came for disposal to the Additional Income-tax Officer, Ajmer stationed at Udaipur, and that Officer ordered levy of tax amounting to Rs. 2,92,666/5/- on the applicant by an order of March, 1955. The applicant has preferred an appeal against that order, and the appeal is pending before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The applicant wanted stay of realization of tax from him. That stay has, however, not been secured by him. Later a penalty of Rs. 15,000/- was imposed on the applicant in July, 1955, under sec. 46(1) of the Act. This order is also open to appeal under sec. 30 of the Act, subject to the proviso that no appeal shall lie against an order under sub-sec.(1) of sec. 46 unless the tax has been paid. The applicant has not filed an appeal against the order of penalty because he is already disputing the tax levied upon him. The main grievance of the applicant, therefore, seems to be that the realization of tax from him is not being stayed even though his appeal is pending, and he has put it in these words in paragraph 43 —

"That although your petitioner has preferred appeals against the orders in question the appellate authorities are wholly powerless in this behalf and cannot control or check the ruinous activities of the opposite party(namely Income-tax Officers) and your petitioner has no remedy but to seek shelter and protection under the high progative powers of this honble High Court, for by the time the appeals may be decided the opposite party may successfully deprive your petitioner of substantially huge amounts of money to the utter ruin of his business and reputation, and a decision of the appeal may be too late to save the situation.

3. The question that calls for consideration is whether this Court should interfere under Art. 226 of the Constitution at this stage.

4. The Income-tax Act is a self-contained Act providing for collection of income-tax. It has provided appeals against the orders of taxing authorities, first, to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and then to the Appellate Tribunal. It has also provided for reference of question of law to this Court by the Appellate Tribunal, It has also given powers to this Court to order the Appellate Tribunal to refer any question of law in case the Appellate Tribunal has refused to do so on an application made by the assessee. The main point involved in this case is a question of law, namely whether, on the law as it stands the Income-tax Officers concerned had the jurisdiction to issue notice to the applicant under sec. 34 and to assess him. The applicant has already filed an appeal to the relevant authority against the order of assessment, and that is awaiting decision. He, however, wants this Court to intervene at this stage before his remedies under the Income-tax Act in the matter of assessment are exhausted. The question, therefore arises, so far as the assessment matter is concerned, whether this Court should intervene under Art. 226 at this stage.

5. We have given the matter our earnest consideration, and are of opinion that we should not exercise our powers under Art. 226 in the case of a self-contained statute like the Act, when there is no allegation of the invalidity of any provision of the Act, and the allegation only is that a particular Income-tax Officer was

Click Here to Read the rest of this document