SASHI PRASAD BARUAH Vs. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the managing director of THEngalbari Tea Estate (Private) Ltd. with its head office at Na-ali, Jorhat. THE company carries on business in tea and owns and possesses several tea gardens in the State of Assam including the THEngalbari Tea Estate. THE Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Shillong (respondent No. 1), by an order dated June 30, 1962, determined the income of the petitioner from cultivation, manufacture and sale of tea of THEngalbari Tea Estate at Rs. 3 00 000 for the assessment year 1957-58, and assessed the petitioner to pay the agricultural income-tax of Rs. 1,01,605 for the year. THE petitioner states that no notice under Section 19(2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, hereinafter called " the Act ", was served upon him prior to the order of assessment. As the tax demand has not been complied with by the petitioner, the respondent No. 1 issued certificate for recovery of the tax and a Bakijai proceeding was started against the petitioner in the court of the Bakijai Officer, Jorhat. In connection with the aforesaid Bakijai proceeding, steps were taken in Land Sale Case No. 60/1968 for sale of immovable properties.

(2.) THE petitioner raised in his petition several pleas including a challenge to the validity of some of the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. THE learned Advocate-General, Nagaland, while arguing the petitioner's case before us, confines himself only to one submission. He contends that in the absence of a notice under Section 19(2) of the Act served on the petitioner, the assessment is one under Section 30 of the Act and hence the order of assessment is illegal and without jurisdiction.

(3.) THE short question that first arises for consideration is whether the notice under Section 19(2) was served on the petitioner. Ordinarily such a question will be a disputed question of fact. But, since the very foundation for the order is a service of notice on the petitioner under Section 19(2), the question will have to be decided in this case as a matter relating to the jurisdiction of the officer on the basis of the affidavits and such proof as is produced before us.