TILLA MOHAMMAD Vs. ADDITIONAL MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from the judgment and order of Ray, J. discharging the rule nisi obtained by the Appellant in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. Before the trial Judge the Appellant sought to have the order of the Additional Member, Board of Revenue, dated May 30, 1961 and the order of the Commissioner, Presidency Division, dated September 7, 1960, quashed under the following circumstances:

(2.) The Appellant is a partner of a firm known as Messrs. Tilla Mohammad Fazal Karim, having 8 as share therein. For the assessment year 1949-50, the Appellant was assessed to income-tax on his 8 as share of profit from the said registered firm of Tilla Mohammad Fazal Karim as per the allocation mentioned in the order of assessment dated March 31, 1954. By the said order his income was assessed at Rs. 36,152. After the assessment order was made, a sum of Rs. 1,500 was deposited by the Appellant towards payment of income-tax of the firm for the said assessment year 1949-50. By an order dated March 29, 1955, the Certificate Officer, 24-Parganas signed a certificate stating that a sum of Rs. 8,818-3 is due from the Appellant as certificate debtor. The said certificate had been forwarded by the Income-tax Officer, District 11(1), Calcutta along with a requisition Under Section 46(2) of the Income-tax Act to the Collector, Alipore. In the certificate proceedings an objection under the Public Demands Recovery Act was made by the Appellant to the effect that the said certificate was not enforceable against him inasmuch as no notice of demand under Section 29 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was served upon the Appellant. The Certificate Officer and the Additional District Magistrate, Alipore, on an appeal by the department, held that the said certificate was invalid as there was no proof that the demand notice was served. The Union of India moved the Commissioner, Presidency Division, by way of revision and the said learned Commissioner by an order dated September 7, 1960, restored the said certificate. Thereafter, on a revision application by the Appellant, the Additional Member, Board of Revenue, by his order dated May 30, 1961, confirmed the order of the learned Commissioner, Presidency Division.

(3.) Mr. T.K. Bose, Learned Counsel for the Appellant, has contended before us that the said certificate proceedings resulting in the order of the learned Additional Member, Board of Revenue, dated May 30, 1961, should be quashed on the following grounds: