JAI KISHAN SRIVASTAVA Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two connected writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution have been referred for decision to the Full Bench as they raise important questions relating to the validity of certain provisions of the Income-tax Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act.'). For convenience, I am giving the facts of one of these writ petitions which is numbered 397 of 1955 in which the petitioner is Jai Kishan Srivastava. The petitioner, on the basis of return submitted by him to the Income-tax Officer, Kanpur, was assessed to tax for the assessment years 1940-41 to 1946-47.

(2.) THE validity of the notices and the proceedings being taken under these notices were challenged by the petitioner on a number of grounds but only two grounds need detailed consideration in this case because, though the other grounds were not given up by Mr. Pathak who argued the case On behalf of the petitioner, he did not advance any arguments before us in respect of those grounds. THE two grounds for challenging the notices and the proceedings which were urged before the Full Bench, were: (1) that Section 34(1 A) of the Act was ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution as it denied equality before the law because persons, who could be dealt with under Section 34(1A), could also be dealt with under Section 34(1) of the Act, and (2) that the proceedings, which were being taken by the Income-tax Officer, were of a judicial or quasi-judicial nature and the Income-tax Officer was a person who had a bias because he Or the Central Board of Revenue, under whom he was employed, was interested as a party in these proceedings. THEse are the two points that mainly need consideration by us.

(3.) THE interpretation by learned counsel for the petitioner that the procedure applicable to proceedings for assessment or re-assessment or re-computation under Section 34 (1)(a) of the Act would be that laid down in Section 23 of the Act is undoubtedly correct. Under Section 34(1)(a) of the Act, the Income-tax Officer is firstly authorised to serve a notice, in the circumstances mentioned therein, on the assessee or the principal officer of the company, it the assessee is a company which notice may contain all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 22 and, upon the service of such a notice, the Income-tax Officer is authorised to take proceedings for assessment, or re-assessment or recomputation.