SHIVAPUTRAPPA CHANNAPPA MUNGOLI Vs. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy J.), this case was posted before us for disposal.

(2.) FOR the assessment year 1975-76 relevant to the previous year ending on March 31, 1975, the petitioners who are agriculturists did not file their return within the time permitted by section 18(1) of the Karnataka Agricultural I.T. Act, 1957 (Karnataka Act No. 22 of 1957) ("the Act"), before the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Dharwar (A.I.T.O.), for which reason that officer issued them a notice under section 18(2) of the Act, calling upon them to file their return, to which also they did not respond. In that view, the A.I.T.O. issued a proposition notice to the petitioners under section 19(4) of the Act, on December 5, 1977, fixing the date of hearing as December 14, 1977, which was however served on them only on December 30, 1977. But the A.I.T.O., without noticing the non-service of the said notice on the petitioners before the hearing date, completed a best judgment assessment against them on December 27, 1977 (Ex. B) under the Act. Against the said order of the A.I.T.O., the petitioners moved the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax ("the Commissioner") in a revision under section 35 of the Act, who on March 9, 1979 (Ex. D), has rejected the same as not maintainable. In this petition, under article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the orders made by the Commissioner and the A.I.T.O.

(3.) THE Commissioner has rejected the revision petition filed by the petitioners as not maintainable on the ground that the order of the A.I.T.O. challenged by them was not prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.