AMICHAND C SHAH Vs. WEALTH TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is the say of the petitioner that the petitioner is being taxed in the status of a HUF under the WT Act, 1957, since number of years. The petitioner has submitted the returns of wealth tax for the concerned asst. yrs. 1972 73 to 1978 79 being with the statement of rental income which showed the rent due on the first day of the calendar year, the rent accrued during the year, the rent received in cash during the year and balance due at the end of the year. In spite of the fact that such balance due at the end of the year was specifically shown, it was not included in the net wealth of the petitioner and the WTO did not include in the assessment of wealth. The petitioner was following the said pattern since years prior to 1972 73 and had continued it up to 1978 79. On the basis of the said returns the WTO under S. 16(3) of the Act had passed the assessment order after investigation of the case. Thereafter the WTO issued notices dt. 18th Feb., 1981 stating that he had reason to believe that the net wealth chargeable to assessment had escaped assessment within the meaning of S. 17 of the Act and had, therefore, asked the petitioner to file returns of wealth within 35 days for the asst. yrs. 1973 74 to 1978 79. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid notices at Exh. "D 1"to "D 7'' and has prayed that the respondent be restrained from taking any further action in pursuance of the said notices.

(2.) AT the time of admission, after hearing the respondent ad interim relief of stay of proceedings pursuant to the impugned notices was granted.

(3.) AT the time of hearing of this petition the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the notice issued by the respondent is on the face of it without jurisdiction as the petitioner has all throughout disclosed the rental income received by him and the rental income which was recoverable by him at the end of the year.