High Court of Allahabad
B.P.Jeevan Reddy, CJ., R.A.Sharma, J.
Janta Metal Works
Vs.
Income-Tax Officer And Ors.
Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition 866T, 882T and 883T of 1987
Decided On : Jul 18, 1990
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, CJ.
1. The petitioner is asking for a writ of cer-tiorari, quashing the notice dated October 8, 1987, issued by the Income-tax Officer, BWard, Moradabad (respondent No. 1), under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act.
2. The petitioner filed a return for the assessment year 1986-87, showing an income of Rs. 71,580 before the Income-tax Officer, C-Ward, Circle-1, Moradabad. Subsequently, his case was transferred to respondent No. 1. In connection with his assessment, respondent No. 1 issued the impugned notice calling upon him to produce his accounts relating to the said assessment year. Soon after receiving the said notice, the petitioner approached this court by way of this writ petition.
The case of the petitioner is this : The Income-tax Department has published an advertisement appearing in Hindustan Times, New Delhi Edition, dated September 1, 1987, with the caption "WE TRUST YOU". The said advertisement stated that all returns showing income/loss up to Rs. 2 lakhs will be accepted without calling the assessee. The advertisement reads as follows :
"WE TRUST YOU
Now we trust you more, The limits for acceptance of returns without calling the taxpayers have now been enhanced to :
(a) In a company case with a return income/loss up to Rs. 50,000.
(b) In the cases of trusts and charitable institutions up to an income of Rs. 1 lakh before applying Section 11 provided the corpus of the trust does not exceed Rs. 5 lakhs.
(c) In all other cases with a return of income/loss up to Rs. 2 lakhs.
HOWEVER
This scheme does not apply to search and seizure cases, cases to be assessed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) and Income-tax Officers of Central Circle and those cases which have been reopened under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
This scheme will apply subject to the above exception for all present assessments including pending assessments as on April 1, 1987.
YOU NOW HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO FILE COMPLETE AND CORRECT RETURN OF INCOME. INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT
PAY YOUR TAXES CORRECTLY AND PROMPTLY"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that this advertisement is really based upon the instructions issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes to all the Commissioners, contained in the letter of the Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, dated May 21, 1987. Particular reliance is placed upon annexure II to the said letter. In so far as it is relevant, it reads thus :
"A. Summary Assessment :
The following types of cases shall be disposed of under the summary assessment scheme ;--
(a) Company cases with returned income/loss up to Rs. 50,000.
(b) Trust cases and cases of charitable institutions having income up to Rs. 1 lakh before applying the provisions of Section 11, provided the corpus of the trust does not exceed Rs. 5 lakhs.
(c) All other cases having returned income/loss up to Rs. 2 lakhs.
2. The Summary Assessment Scheme shall not apply to the following cases :
(a) Search and seizure cases.
(b) Cases assigned to Inspecting Assistant Commissioners (Assessment) and Income-tax Officers (Central Circle),
(c) Cases to be assessed or reassessed under Section 147.
But for the above exceptions, the summary assessment scheme shall apply to all cases assessed in all Wards and Circles.
3. The Summary Assessment Scheme as modified in para I above shall apply to all assessments including the pending assessments brought forward on April 1, 1987 .. .
B. Sample scrutiny assessments :
(1) Two per cent. of the cases completed under summary assessment scheme in the year 1986-87 shall be selected for sample scrutiny. The method of selection is set out in annexure III.
(2) While doing sample scrutiny, the preceding assessments except those covered by the Amnesty Scheme should also be scrutinised with a view to finding out whether any action for recoupment of escaped revenue is necessary under Section 143(2)(b), 147, 154 or 263. Such action should be taken immediately after the escapement is detected.
C. Selective scruti
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.