JAGMOHAN GOENKA Vs. K D BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of this case are as follows: The petitioner Jagmohan Goenka had been carrying on a business in colliery (The Jemchary Selected Colliery) at Raniganj, under the name and style of Jagmohan Kishorilal. He has been assessed to income-tax since the assessment year 1937-38. The assessments for the years 1942-43 and 1946-47 have been duly made. The assessment order (under Section 23/3 of the I. T. Act) for 1942-43 is dated 24-5-1944 and that for 1946-47 is dated 18-9-1946.

(2.) In May/June 1948, notice under Section 22(2) read with Section 34, Income-tax Act was served upon the assessee, for re-opening the assessment for the year 1946-47. The reason given for this was that the assessee had not disclosed the fact that he had received a sum of Rs. 12,246/10/0 as bonus from the Government of India. The re-assessment was made on 29-6-1948.

(3.) On 26-3-1951, notice was issued upon the petitioner under Section 34, I. T. Act as amended in 1948, for re-opening the assessment for 1942-43. This was served at the colliery upon Kishorilal Goenka, brother of the petitioner. The ground was that the petitioner had been under-assessed for the year 1942-43. A similar notice was issued and served similarly, in respect of the assessment year 1946-47. The ground was also under assessment in this case. We are concerned here with the proceedings initiated by this latter notice. The petitioner complied with the notices under protest (because he disputed the propriety of the service of notice upon his brother).