Balakrishna Ayyar, J.-

This is a Petition for the issue of a writ prohibiting the Additional Income-tax Officer, Ootacamund, from continuing certain proceedings which he initiated by means of a notice issued under section 34 of the Income-tax Act, dated 6th February, 1957 and numbered as 86-S/45-46.

The petitioner is an assessee on the file of the Additional Income-tax Officer, Ootacamund, in G.I. No. 86-S. On 18th December, 1946, the Income-tax Officer assessed the petitioner on a total income of Rs. 5,143 under section 23 (3) of the Act. Subsequently, on 31st March, 1956, the Income-tax Officer re-assessed him on a total income of Rs. 39,568. In this amount was included a sum of Rs. 31,000 which the assessee alleged he had taken on loan from Messrs. Mangilal Inderchand, a firm carrying on business in Rajasthan, but which the Income-tax Officer held was Income from undisclosed sources.

The petitioner appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Coimbatore and raised various contentions. One point that he took was that the Income-tax Officer had not judicially considered the evidence which he had tendered to show that the sum of Rs. 31,000 really represented a loan that he had taken from Messrs. Mangilal Inderchand. Alternatively he contended that in any event the entire sum of Rs. 31,000 would not come in for assessment for the assessment year 1946-47 as his previous year relevant for the assessment year 1946-47 ended on 5th November, 1945, and, it has been held that for assessing the income from other sources the previous year to be adopted is the financial year unless the assessee has any other previous year in respect of the same.

The Appellate Assistant Commisisoner did not accept the contention of the petitioner that the amount represented loans he had taken from Messrs. Mangilal Inderchand. He however found that a sum of Rs. 20,000 out of Rs. 31,000 came in as credits on 25th January, 1945 and 8th March, 1945 and that therefore the amount of Rs. 20,000 could not be assessed in the assessment year 1946-47. He therefore ordered that this sum of Rs. 20,000 should be deleted from the income for that year. This is what the Assistant Commissioner said in respect of this matter:

“ I would, therefore, sustain the action of the Income-tax Officer in treating the amount of Rs. 31,000 as income from undisclosed sources. Mr. Sethuraman argued at this stage that in any event the amount of Rs. 20,000 represented by credits on 25th January, 1945 and 8th March, 1945, would properly fall to be assessed in the assessment year 1945-46 following the judgment of the Patna High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar and Orissa v. P. Darolia &38; Sons1. Following the Judgment of the Patna High Court, I would concede the position in favour of the appellant and delete the amount of Rs. 20,000 from the assessment. The Income-tax Officer will be at liberty to re-open the assessment of 1945-46 for including this amount in that assessment.”

The assessment for 1945-46 had been completed by the Income-tax Officer on 31st December, 1945. But acting on what the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had said, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice, dated 6th February, 1957, under section 34 of the Income-tax Act calling upon the petitioner to submit a return for the assesmsnet year 1945-46. On 18th June, 1957, the Income-tax Officer also issued a notice under section 22 (4) of the Income-tax Act calling upon the petitioner to produce his books relating to the year ended Deepavali, 1944. Since the notice related to a year eleven years prior to the date of issue of the notice the petitioner wrote to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, asking to be informed how an assessment which was time-barred was sought to be made on him and also his reasons for sanctioning the commencement of the proceedings under section 34 of the Act. On 22nd July, 1957, the Commissioner of Income-tax replied that the proceedings had been initiated by the Income-tax Of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document