SOVA SARKAR Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned trial judge, discharging the rule nisi obtained by the appellant on his petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) The appellant carries on his business as a government contractor, and he is an assessee under the I.T. Act, 1961. He filed his return for the A. Ys. 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70, within the period prescribed therefor. He was served with a notice under Section 143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on May 25, 1971, whereby he was called upon by the ITO to appear and produce the relevant evidence in support of the returns filed by him. The date of hearing of the assessment proceedings was fixed as June 17, 1971, which was subsequently adjourned to September 22, 1971. On that date, the appellant was heard by the ITO. He produced before the ITO, the payment certificate in original as given to him by the government, the bank pass book and other relevant documents in connection with the hearing of the assessment proceedings. No order of assessment was, however, passed and no notice of demand was sent to the appellants. On June 15, 1973, the appellant made an application for an I.T. clearance certificate. On June 16, 1973, a certificate was given to the appellant by one P.K. Chatterjee, ITO, Project Circle, North Bengal, Siliguri. In para. A(ii), at page 2 of the certificate, it was inserted in ink by the said P.K. Chatterjee that the returns of income filed by the appellant for the assessment years 1967-68 to 1969-70 were invalid. It is the case of the appellant that on coming to know of the said insertion, he, by his letter dated August 22, 1973, addressed to the said ITO, stated that all the returns in question were submitted by him in time, but he was not informed of the alleged invalidity of the returns filed by him. Further, it was stated by him in the said letter that he was not given any opportunity of being heard as to the alleged invalidity of the returns and requested the ITO to issue to him a fresh income-tax clearance certificate without any such remark.

(3.) The appellant did not receive any reply to his said letter dated August 22, 1973, but on March 18, 1974, he was served with three notices under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, all dated March 14, 1974, and issued by the said P.K. Chatterjee, wherein it was alleged that the ITO had reasons to believe that the income of the appellant, chargeable to tax for the A. Yrs. 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70, had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act, and the appellant was called upon to file returns for the said assessment years within 30 days of the date of the receipt of the notices. Immediately on receipt of the aforesaid notices, on March 29, 1974, the appellant wrote to the ITO contending, inter alia, that since the returns for the said assessment years were already submitted by him and the assessment proceedings were pending, the ITO had no jurisdiction to issue notices under Section 148 of the Act. It was the case of the appellant that there was absolutely no material before the ITO on which he could form a reasonable belief that the appellant's income had escaped assessment for the said assessment years or that the alleged escapement of income was on account of any omission or failure on the part of the appellant to file his returns for the assessment years in question. By a writ petition, the appellant challenged the legality of the said notices under Section 148 of the Act.