RAMNARAIN BHOJNAGARWALLA Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER A WARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Ramnarain Bhojnagarwalla, was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1948-49 in the usual course. Thereafter, on or about the 19th March, 1965, the Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, District IV(i), Calcutta, the respondent No. 1 herein, addressed a letter to the petitioner stating therein, inter alia, that in the course of inquiries, it has been found that the petitioner operated a bank account in the United Commercial Bank Ltd , 2 Royal Exchange Place, Calcutta, in the name of his nephew, Madhanlal Agarwalla, of 12, Nirmal Lohia Lane. It was further stated that it has been found that the petitioner had been operating the said account by getting his nephew, Madanlal Agarwalla, to sign cheques and other papers with regard to the said account and that there was evidence to suggest that the said account belonged solely to the petitioner. According to the said letter, diverse amounts had been put in the said account in the accounting year 1947-48 corresponding to the assessment year 1948-49. The petitioner was asked to show cause why the said amounts totalling Rs. 2,51,502 should not be treated as the petitioner's income for the assessment year 1948-49 and why proceedings under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") should not be initiated against the petitioner.

(2.) By his letter dated the 22nd March, 1965, the petitioner denied the allegations contained in the said letter, dated the 19th March, 1965, and contended that the respondent-Income-tax Officer had no reason for coming to the conclusion stated in the said letter.

(3.) Thereafter, on or about the 27th March, 1965, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was served on the petitioner, wherein it was stated that the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that the income of the petitioner in respect of which he was chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1948-49, had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. By the said notice the petitioner was required to deliver within 30 days from the date of the service of the notice a return in the prescribed form for the said assessment year. It was further stated in the said notice that it was issued after obtaining the necessary satisfaction of the Central Board of Revenue. It is this notice dated the 27th March, 1965, which is challenged before me in this application.