(1.) THESE four petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution are directed against four orders of assessment under Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereafter referred to as the Act. The fact of the four cases are similar. THESE cases raise common questions of law. It will, therefore, be sufficient to refer to the facts of one of the four cases.
(2.) SMT. Parbati Devi is the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3316 of 1968. On June 26, 1952, she invested a sum of Rs. 22,000 as her share in the capital of a certain partnership firm, which worked under the name and style of M/s. Shanker Iron Foundry. A notice under Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was issued against the firm for the assessment year 1953-54. On February 28, 1966, the petitioner filed a voluntary return of her own income for the assessment year 1953-54. On the basis of the petitioner's voluntary return the Income-tax Officer, Varanasi, passed an assessment order against the petitioner on April 1, 1966. On the strength of that assessment order, a notice was served upon her demanding a sum of Rs. 3.869.10 as income-tax for the assessment year 1953-54. The petitioner filed a revision against the assessment order dated April 1, 1966. The revision was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income-tax. SMT. Parbati Devi has, therefore, filed the present writ petition challenging the assessment order dated April 1, 1966, the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax dismissing the revision and the notice demanding payment of the sum of Rs. 3,869.10.
(3.) IT will be noticed that ordinarily assessment had to be completed within four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Under special circumstances, the period of limitation might extend to eight years. The period of eight years from the end of 1953-54 expired on March 31, 1962. The Income-tax Act, 1961, came into force on April 1, 1962. By this time assessment had become barred by time under Sub-section (3) of Section 34 of the 1922 Act.