MASROOR AHMAD FARUQI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an order by Mootham, C.J. dismissing the appellants petition for a writ to quash certain proceedings for recovery of agricultural income tax from him pending in the court of the Collector, Sitapur.

(2.) We are concerned with the agricultural income-tax assessed for 1360 Fasli under the U. P. Agricultural Income tax Act, No. III of 1949. The assessing officer assessed the appellant under Sec. 16(4) of the Act to the tax of Rs. 1,000 and odd: the assessment was ex parte. Sec. 20 of the Act requires that a notice of demand of tax imposed under Sec. 16 should be served upon him and naturally he did not pay the tax. If he was aggrieved by the assessment, two remedies were open to him, one by an appeal as provided in Sec. 21, and the other by an application for revision as provided by Sec. 22. He chose the second remedy and on 6-3-1954 filed an application in revision before the Board of Revenue, but it was dismissed on 29-11-1954. Sec. 23 provides that "An authority passing any final order under Sec. 21 or Sec. 22 shall communicate such order to the assessee."

(3.) The appellant paid no instalment. On 11-2-1956 the assessing officer, treating him as in default., imposed upon him a penalty of Rs. 150 in exercise of the power conferred by Sec. 31 and the penalty also was not paid by him. On 13-2-1956 the assessing officer applied to the Collector under R. 28(4) of the Rules framed under the Act for realisation of the tax and the penalty. Sec. 32 provides that the Collector on the motion of the assessing authority may recover any penalty imposed under Sec. 31 or when an assessee is in default, the amount assessed as tax as if it were an arrear of land revenue and that no proceedings for the recovery of any sum payable under the Act can be commenced.