LAWS(APH)-1962-11-21

DEVI DAYAL MARWAH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Decided On November 29, 1962
DEVI DAYAL MARWAH Appellant
V/S
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH, AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been referred to us by our learned brother, Seshachalapati J., having regard to the importance of the case.

(2.) The petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ of certiorari of quashing the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Con. No. 41 of 1960, dated February 1, 1962, and to pass such further or other appropriate order or orders as this honble court may deem it necessary.

(3.) The facts relevant for the purposes of determining the questions raised before us may now be briefly state : The petitioner, who is a refugee from Lahore, is the proprietor of the firm, Devi Dayal Co., carrying on business at Delhi as successor to Himatlal Fateh Mohammad Co., which latter firm was being assessed at Dhanbad in Bihar State. After the petitioner had succeeded to this firm, he made an application to the Central Board of Revenue (hereinafter called the Board) for a transfer of the case of that firm under section 5(7A) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the Act) and after correspondence between the representative of the petitioner with the Board, the Board by its order C. No. 29A(97)-IT/50 dated May 12, 1951, instructed the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, to cancel the assessment already made in the case of Himatlal Fateh Mohammad Co. (successor M/s. Devi Dayal Co.) and to transfer the records of the case to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, Rajasthan, Ajmer and Madhya Bharat, Delhi, for the purposes of making a fresh assessment, provided a formal security bond is executed for payment of the tax which may be found due . Subsequent to this communication, the assessments were evidently being made by the Income-tax Officer at Delhi till 1955. Thereafter, it appears that the Income-tax Officer at Delhi had tried to serve certain notices and a representative of the petitioner, one Narinder Nath Chopra, by his letter dated December 3, 1957, intimated the officer as follow :