B T SHANKER HEGDE Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The notice issued under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961 and another notice issued under s. 16(2) of the WT Act, are challenged in these Writ Petitions.

(2.) Emergent notice had been ordered by this Court regarding rule. Sri Srinivasan, ld. counsel for the Department has appeared and produced the record relating to the issue of the notice under s. 148. Though several grounds are urged in the Writ Petition, the reason for issuance of the notice under s. 148 as could be seen from the records is on the basis of information gathered by the Department with respect of an alleged gift made by one Fernand Perreten in favour of the petitioner. I have perused the other reasons recorded by the Officer before the issuance of the notice. I am satisfied that there are sufficient reasons for the issue of the said notice. In the result, the challenge made to the notice issued under s. 148 of the IT Act does not survive. The petitioner may however file his objections to the said notice and participate in further proceedings.

(3.) The next notice that is challenged is, the notice issued under s. 16(2) of the WT Act calling upon the petitioner to furnish information in respect of his assessment for the year 1977-78. There is no ground to interfere with the said notice.