(1.) BY separate petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Arun Kumar Maheshwari, petitioner in Civil Misc. Writ Petn. No. 538 of 2001; Amit Kumar Maheshwari, petitioner in Civil Misc. Writ Petn. No. 539 of 2001 and Ajay Kumar Maheshwari, petitioner in Civil Misc. Writ Petn. No. 540 of 2001 seek a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dt. 15th March, 2001, issued by the ITO, Ward Bijnor, relating to the asst. yr. 1995 -96. Civil Misc. Writ Petn. No. 709 of 2001 has been filed by six persons, namely, Lalit Kumar Agrawal, Raj Kamal Agrawal, Atul Kumar Agrawal who are brothers, and their wives seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing separate notices issued to them on 15th March, 2001, by the ITO, Ward Bijnor, respondent No. 1, under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act'), relating to the asst. yr. 1996 -97. Since all the four petitions raise a common question of law, they are being decided together by a common judgment and order. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to Civil Misc. Writ Petn. Nos. 538 to 540 of 2001 are as follows :
(2.) ARUN Kumar Maheshwari and Ajay Kumar Maheshwari are brothers whereas Amit Kumar Maheshwari is the son of Arun Kumar Maheshwari. Arun Kumar Maheshwari and Amit Kumar Maheshwari are assessed to tax in the status of HUF whereas Ajay Kumar Maheshwari is assessed in the status of individual. For the asst. yr. 1995 -96 all the three petitioners filed their return of income on 31st March, 1996 disclosing the following income : Arun Kumar Maheshwari Rs. 29,850 Ajay Kumar Maheshwari Rs. 1,50,990 Amit Kumar Maheshwari Rs. 29,850
(3.) IT is claimed by the petitioners that in the return of wealth they had filed complete details of their wealth which included copies of their account in the firm M/s Shanti Sugar Industries, Ravi Nagar, except in the case of Amit Kumar Maheshwari where the copy of the capital account in the firm M/s Maheshwari Sugar Industries was filed.