LOKENDRA SINGH RATHORE Vs. WEALTH TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE material facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are as follows : THE petitioner owned 203 bighas of agricultural land situated in village Dosigaon in Ratlam District and 168 bighas of BIR situated in village Morwani. While submitting his return for wealth-tax for the assessment year 1970-71, the petitioner declared the value of the aforesaid agricultural land and BIR at Rs. 70,820 as on March 31, 1970, which was the relevant valuation date for the assessment year 1970-71. THE petitioner contends that the valuation was declared by him on the basis of the report of an approved valuer. THE valuation was accepted by the Department and the assessment of the petitioner to wealth-tax for the assessment year 1970-71 was made on the basis of that valuation. For the assessment year 1971-72, the valuation of the land in question made by the petitioner on the basis of the valuation made for the assessment year 1970-71 was accepted by the Department. On August 16, 1971, the petitioner sold 168 bighas of BIR for Rs. 16,000, and on March 15, 1972, the petitioner sold 150 bighas of agricultural land for Rs. 30,000. As the petitioner was left only with 53 bighas of agricultural land for the assessment year 1972-73, after deducting the sale price of the land sold as aforesaid, the valuation of the remaining land was made by the petitioner, on the basis of the valuer's report. That valuation was accepted by the Department and the order of assessment was passed on January 17, 1973. For the assessment year 1973-74 also, the petitioner declared 53 bighas of agricultural land in his return of wealth-tax and declared the valuation at Rs. 24,872 on the basis of the valuation declared for the assessment year 1972-73. That valuation was accepted by the WTO who completed the assessment and passed the order of assessment on December 28, 1973. THEreafter, on March 23, 1981, notices were served by respondent No. 1, the WTO, on the petitioner under Section 17 of W.T Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act)", for reopening the assessments of the petitioner for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74. THE petitioner contends that he had disclosed fully and truly all the primary facts necessary for the assessments in question and, therefore, respondent No. 1 had no jurisdiction to issue the notices for reopening the assessments.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the Department was unable to point out as to why the ratio of the aforesaid decision would not be attracted in this case. In view of the aforesaid decision, it must be held that the petitioner having placed all the primary facts before the WTO with regard to the value of the agricultural land, recourse to Section 17(1)(a) of the Act by the WTO for reopening the assessments in question was not justified.