KUNDANLAL MALHOTRA Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing a certificate issued under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890, by the Income -tax Officer, B -Ward, Satna, to the Collector of Chhatarpur for the recovery of the income -tax amount said to be due from the petitioner. The applicant also prays that a writ of prohibition be also issued to the opponents restraining them from taking any proceedings for the recovery of Rs. 38,980.69 nP. on account of income -tax from the applicant.

(2.) THE material facts, briefly stated, are that the applicant was a partner in a registered firm styled as 'Moona Lall and Sons' of Mall Road Kanpur. In the assessment of the firm for the assessment year 1950 -51 the petitioners share of profits was computed at Rs. 88,878. This was on March 17, 1955. On the same date the petitioner filed a return of his income for the assessment year 1950 -51. On the basis of that return he was assessed to tax in the sum of Rs. 39,429 -15 -0. A notice of demand was accordingly issued to him for the payment of this amount. There is some dispute as to the date on which the assessment was made on the petitioner and the date on which the notice of demand was issued to him. According to the applicant the notice of demand was issued on March 17, 1955, where the actual assessment was made on March 18, 1955, and consequently the notice of demand was invalid. The petitioner appealed against the assessment and obtained some relief from the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The assessment was revised according to the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the petitioner was asked by the Income -tax Officer, Kanpur, to pay Rs. 38,429 -15 -0 on or before March 6, 1956. As the amount was not paid by the applicant within the time fixed, a penalty was imposed by the Income -tax Officer. On December 24, 1956, the Income -tax Act to the Collector, Kanpur, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 40,329 -15 -0. It appears that subsequently the applicants assessment file was transferred to the Income -tax Officer, who on February 27, 1959, issued a certificate under section 46(2) of the Act to the Collector, Chhatarpur, for the recovery of Rs. 38,980.69 nP. according to the assessment order made by the Income -tax Officer, Kanpur, in March, 1955.

(3.) IT is clear from this provision that when any sum is recoverable by any public officer other than a Collector, then the Collector of the district in which the office of the public officer is situated alone can send a certificate of the amount to be recovered to the Collector of another district for the recovery of the amount under the Act. Now here the amount of income -tax is clearly recoverable by the Income -tax officer, Satna, which place is in Satna District itself. The Collector of Satna could therefore on the request of the Income -tax Officer, Satna, Proceed to recover the sum as an arrear of land revenue which has accrued in his own district and he alone could issue a certificate for the recovery of the amount to the Collector of another district. Chhatarpurand Satba are two separate districts. Therefore, the Income -tax Officer, Satna, had no jurisdiction to issue the certificate that he did issue to the Collector, Chhatarpur. The proceedings for recovery initiated in Chhatarpur district on the basis of this certificate issued by the Income -tax Officer, Satna, are therefore wholly without jurisdiction and must be quashed.