BANSILAL AND CO Vs. PRABHU DAYAL ITO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MARCH 9, 1990 : By this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a registered partnership firm, carrying on money-lending business, has challenged the two notices dated MARCH 30, 1983, issued by the ITO under s. 148 read with s. 147(a) of the IT Act, 1961, for the asst. yrs. 1978-79 and 1979-80. The petition came up for admission before this Court on November 23, 1983, when, referring to the Supreme Court decision in ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 1976 CTR (SC) 220 : (1976) 103 ITR 437, this Court issued rule in terms of prayer (a) and passed an interim order in terms of prayer (d).

(2.) HOWEVER, despite the specific order, the grounds on the basis of which the ITO had issued the impugned notices were not furnished to the petitioner nor was any affidavit-in-reply filed. In the circumstances, the petition was heard on the facts stated in the petition and those borne out from other documents furnished by the petitioner along with its writ petition.

(3.) ON the face of it, the notices did not disclose whether they were issued under s. 147(a) or under s. 147(b). The notices did not also disclose the reasons why they were issued. The petitioner requested the ITO, vide its letter dated April 26, 1983, for information in this regard. By letter dated May 12, 1983, from the ITO, the petitioner was informed that the assessments were reopened under the provisions of s. 147(a) for the reason that "from scrutiny of your books of account seized relevant to the aforesaid assessment years and earlier and subsequent years, it is quite clear that you have introduced certain cash credits in your books, which are of dubious nature and from the parties who are suspected and/or made confession before other IT authorities".