AMIR UDDIN Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner--an assessee, has questioned the legality and validity of an order dated July 14, 1992 (annexure-C), passed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Indore, under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity "the Act"). The facts which lie in a narrow compass and which are relevant for the disposal of this writ petition need mention infra.

(2.) THE petitioner, an assessee, is engaged in the business of sale of kerosene and transport. He is also engaged in other kinds of businesses which he is carrying on as partner with some other persons. He also owns certain immovable properties which yield yearly income liable to be taxed under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. THE petitioner is being assessed to payment of income-tax as an individual.

(3.) BY the impugned order dated july 14, 1992, (annexure-C), the Assessing Officer (the ITO) in exercise of his power conferred under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, held that the income shown by the assessee (petitioner) under the head "Long-term capital gains" is not or/and cannot be described to have been received from/under the head income from "long-term capital gains" but it is in fad an income received from/under the head "Adven- ture in the nature of trade". It is against this finding changing the head of sources of income, as referred to supra, that the petitioner has felt aggrieved and filed this writ petition.