NOSHIRWAN Vs. WEALTH TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners by this petition have prayed that the notices issued under Section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, by the respondent annexures "H", "H-1", '"H-2", "H-3" and "J" may be quashed and the respondent be prohibited from further proceeding in pursuance of the abovementioned notices.

(2.) PETITIONERS Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are the sons of the late Shri Manoharji Godrej and petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 are his daughters. The petitioners are related as brothers and sisters belonging to the same family. The petitioners are Parsi by caste. Respondent No. 1 is the Wealth-tax Officer, A-Ward, Indore, and has jurisdiction to assess the petitioners under the Wealth-tax Act. The assessment years involved in the present petition are 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79. The petitioners jointly own five properties-(1) Godrej Mansion, 110, Ushaganj, Indore, (2) Gul Mansion, 9, Maharani Road, Indore, (3) Flat No. 8, Mistry Court, Bombay, (4) Show Room at Imami Gate, Bhopal, and (5) a building situated on Bombay-Agra Road, Indore, All the aforesaid properties are being jointly owned by petitioners Nos. 1 to 5 along with their brother, Shri Bomy Godrej, as co-owners, so that each of the petitioners is owner to the extent of 1/6th share in the aforesaid properties. Besides 1/6th share in the aforesaid properties, petitioners Nos. 1 to 5 have their respective individual wealth. PETITIONERS Nos. 1 to 5 are assessees under the Wealth-tax Act and have been paying wealth-tax.

(3.) THE principal submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners is that the assessment has been made on the basis of the valuation which has been determined on the basis of the criteria laid down by the Tribunal. When earlier an assessment order has been passed, subsequently that assessment cannot be reopened on account of change of opinion and secondly it is submitted that the assessment notices also are beyond jurisdiction as the petitioners had already disclosed all their wealth. THErefore, there is no concealment on the part of the petitioners as they have disclosed facts truly and correctly, as such Section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act will not come into play and so far as Section 17(1)(b) is concerned, on the basis of the information, the assessing authority cannot reopen because four years had passed. THE period of limitation prescribed for issuing notice under Section 17(1)(b) is four years.