MPARMANAND AND Vs. ADDITIONAL INCOME TAX OFFICER BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is only one point raised in these two petitions and it arises in this way. The Petitioner in W. P. No. 134 of 55 is the son and the petitioner in W. P. No. 135 of 55 is his father. Both of them were partners in a firm known as "Chandiram Brothers" dealing in Silk goods at Bangalore. The son was assessed on 31-3-1954 and the father was assessed on 30-12-1954, in respect of their income for the assessment year 1950-51. In the order of assessment, which was made under Section 23 (3) of the Indian Income Tax Act, it was stated that the assessment was made subject to revision under Section 35 of the Income Tax Act on determination of the correct share of income in the firms accounts. Thereafter on 29th March 1955 the firm was assessed, and the total income assessed was Rs. 93,461/-. On such assessment it was found that the previous assessments of the petitioners were less than what they should have been, and thereupon the Income Tax Officer, purporting to act under Section 19 of the Indian Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 1953 gave notices to the petitioners asking them to appear before him, to show cause as to why the mistakes made in the assessment order already made should not be rectified. The Income Tax Officer did rectify the mistake on 23-8-1955. The present petitions have been filed challenging the jurisdiction of the Income tax officer to make the said rectifications.

(2.) It would be necessary at this stage to set out the relevant provisions of the Indian Income Tax Act. Section 35 of the Indian Income Tax Act as it originally stood and which empowered the income-tax authorities to correct mistakes which were apparent on the face of it inter alia provided as follows:-

(3.) Section 19 of the Indian Income Tax (Amendment) Act (Act XXV) of 1953 which came into force on 1st April 1952, inter alia provided as follows :-