OMPRAKASH AGARWAL Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER B WARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this application has challenged the notice dated 13th March, 1969, issued by the Income-tax Officer, "B" Ward, Siliguri, whereby he was called upon to furnish the annual return for the financial year 1967-68, under Section 206 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(2.) The petitioner states that after the death of his father on 8th May, 1968, he as karta of the joint Hindu family of the deceased was managing the Bagdogra Tea Estate having its head office and principal place of business at 72, Girish Park North, Calcutta-6, and the garden at Bagdogra in the district of Darjeeling. It is alleged that Bagdogra Tea Estate is a regular assessee under Income-tax Officer, "A" Ward, District II(I), Calcutta, and has been assessed by the said Income-tax Officer up to the assessment year 1964-65. The petitioner received two notices dated 13th March, 1962, from the respondent No. 1, Income-tax Officer, "B" Ward, Siliguri, from which it appears that he had not yet submitted the annual return for the financial year 1967-68 under Section 206(1) of the Act. The petitioner was further requested to furnish the annual return under the aforesaid section failing which he was asked to show cause why penalty under Section 276(b) of the Act should not be imposed upon him. The case was fixed for hearing on 21st March, 1969, when he was asked to produce evidence of filing of annual return under Section 206(1) of the Act, if the same was already furnished, on 21st March, 1969. On the same date, i.e., 13th March 1969, the respondent No. 1 issued a notice upon the principal officer, Bagdogra Tea Estate, whereby the said principal officer was called upon to show cause why penalty under Section 221(1) of the Act should not be imposed for failure to deduct tax on the amount of the "salaries" payable to the employees. The said case was also fixed on 21st March, 1969. The petitioner's advocate by a letter dated 1st April, 1969, addressed to the respondent No. 1 pointed out that Bagdogra Tea Estate is not an assessee in the ward of respondent No. 1 and it has been regularly assessed by the Income-tax Officer, "A" Ward, District II(I). It was, therefore, contended that respondent No. 1 had no authority, competence and/or jurisdiction to issue the said notice dated 13th March, 1969, On this allegation the petitioner came to this court and obtained a Rule nisi.

(3.) An affidavit by Sachindra Kumar Bose affirmed on 5th February, 1971, has been filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2. In paragraph 5 of the said affidavit it is stated that Messrs. Bagdogra Tea Estate is being assessed to income-tax in respect of the firm's income. Hence the employees of the company at Bagdogra for the purpose of assessment fall within the jurisdiction of respondent No. 1 in pursuance of order No. 2P/6/67-68 dated 31st August, 1967, issued by the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-1, in exercise of his power conferred by Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 124 of the Act. It is further stated in the said affidavit that a notice under Section 206(1) of the Act was issued by respondent No. 1 as he had got the jurisdiction over the employees of the said company in pursuance of the aforesaid order of the Commissioner of Income-tax. It is further alleged that although the petitioner was called upon to submit the annual return of its employees for the financial year 1967-68 and the date was fixed for hearing on 21st March, 1969, the petitioner instead of complying with the said notice and appearing before the respondent No. 1 rushed to this court for cancellation of the said notices.