(1.) THE captioned writ petitions lay challenge to the provisions of Section 271(1B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') on the ground that it isultra viresthe Constitution of India. The impugned provision which was brought on to the statute book by the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from (w.r.e.f.) 01.04.1989, has resulted in a grievance in so far as the petitioners/assessees are concerned, in as much as, apropos to its insertion in the Act, the salutary requirement of the Assessing Officer arriving at his own satisfaction during the course of assessment proceedings that the assessee has concealed the particulars of his income or has furnished inaccurate particulars before initiating penalty proceedings has been done away, by a deeming fiction encapsulated therein. This, in short, is the kernel of the controversy before us. As is evident on a bare reading of the provisions of Section 271(1B) of the Act that the deeming fiction envisaged in the said provision which is to operate retrospectively, pertains only to clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 271 of the Act.
(2.) CONSEQUENTLY , the writ petitioners before us have made the following main prayers in their respective writ petitions:
(3.) IN respect of Writ Petition No. 5059/2008, we had called for ITA No. 548/2006, which is an appeal filed by the Department against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal') quashing the penalty proceedings, in order to ascertain the bare facts; the writ petition being bereft of facts essential for the purposes of adjudication. The following facts, which are not disputed, emerge on reading of the file.