N. SEETHARAMAN Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed present Writ Petition to quash the File No. S -7028/Cir.II/Mdu for the Block Assessment years 1989 -90 to 1999 -2000 and consequently direct the respondent to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer with a direction to confine himself to the order under Section 264 of the Commissioner of Income Tax -I, Madurai.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to the Writ Petition are as follows: The petitioner is carrying on a small -scale business in making Gold jewellary out of old ornaments and the same is being sold in Trivandram. The making charges in the State of Kerala are comparatively higher than Madurai. His sons are also doing the same business and help him in his trade. They are assessed to income tax separately in Madurai. The petitioner is an assessee from the assessment year 1993 -94 and presently assessed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income -Tax, Circle -II,. Madurai. On 18.11.1998, when7 the petitioner was staying in a lodge in Trivandram, the local police apprehended him and found in his possession jewellery, weighing 781.3 grams and cash of Rs. 40,800/ -. On intimation by the police, the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Cochin, gave a requisition under Section 132 -A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the Police Department and the above said jewellary and cash were seized by the Income Tax Department. Pursuant to the notice under Section 158(B)(C) of the Act, the petitioner filed a return of income in Form 2B on 25.08.1999, admitting a total income of Rs. 6,000/ - per month and requested that the tax payable be adjusted out of the seized cash.

(3.) REFERRING to Section 158(B)(b) of the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has submitted that the income, which he had disclosed before the action under Section 132 -A of the Act, cannot fall within the definition of 'undisclosed income'. The Assessing Officer, rejecting the above said contention of the petitioner, by his order dated 31.03.2000, made an assessment computing the undisclosed income of Rs. 2,79,087/ -, including the income of his sons on the ground that no books of accounts were maintained by them. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the Revision Petition on 26.03.2001 under Section 264 of the Act to the Commissioner of Income Tax -I, Madurai, by withdrawing the appeal so as to get the seized jewels. The Revisional Authority, by order dated 01.11.2002, found that the submissions of the petitioner were not appreciated in proper perspective by the Assessing Officer and therefore, with a view to re -examine the matter, directed the assessing Officer to adjudicate the matter afresh, after taking into account the assessee's version. Pursuant to the revisional order, the assessing officer went on to consider the other issues for the first time and completed the assessment on a higher total income of Rs. 6,55,540/ -. The above said order was received by the assesses/petitioner on 18.03.2004 and the same is challenged in this Writ Petition.