RAJEEV DRONA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a tax practitioner on the income -tax side at Kanpur, has filed this petition for quashing of the order dated March 23, 1989, passed by the Asst. CIT (Investigation), Circle II (1), Kanpur, for the asst. yrs. 1986 -87 and 1987 -88.

(2.) IT is urged that since the notices issued under S. 147/148 of the IT Act are without jurisdiction, the entire assessment orders are liable to be quashed. According to learned counsel, the procedure provided under the Act, namely, the existence, applying mind to it and recording reasons, getting endorsement of the CIT were not followed. Therefore, the conditions precedent for exercise, of reopening were absent.

(3.) TWO other submissions may also be noticed : one is that the order is arbitrary and that it was passed without affording any opportunity. Any comment by this Court on either of these aspects may prejudice the claim of the petitioner. But all this happened for what the petitioner has to blame himself.