SOHANI DEVI JAIN Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Division Bench which heard this writ petition in the first instance was of the opinion that it involves an important question of law and therefore requires to be heard by a larger bench. Hence this writ petition has been referred to this Bench.

(2.) IN this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order of assessment dated 24-3-1965 passed by the Income-tax Officer 'A' Ward Jorhat for the assessment year 1960-61 and the Notice of Demand of the same date as well as for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refund the sum of Rs. 10,000/- collected from the petitioner in pursuance of the said notice.

(3.) THE return for the assessment year 1960-61 was submitted by the petitioner as stated above on 29-7-1964 before the Income-tax Officer, Jorhat. The Income-tax Officer, Jorhat was of the opinion that the assessments made at Calcutta were of doubtful validity and assessed the petitioner again by his order dated 24-3-1965 for the year 1960-61. In the said assessment he added the whole of the investment made by the petitioner amounting to Rs. 28,500/- as income from undisclosed sources and raised the demand of Rs. 18,494.98 by way of tax. The petitioner filed the appeal against the order of assessment before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Dibrugarh Range, Dibrugarh. The appeal was rejected on 26-11-1968 since the appellate authority was of the view that the assessment made by the Income-tax Officer, Calcutta for the assessment year 1960-61 was not a bar to the order of assessment made by the Income-tax Officer, Jorhat. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, 'C', Calcutta against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The appeal was rejected by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by its order dated 24-11-1969. It was of the view that the petitioner was residing at Jorhat in the relevant accounting period and as such the Income-tax Officer, Jorhat had the jurisdiction to assess the petitioner. The petitioner filed an application before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal requesting it to refer certain points of law arising out of its order to the High Court. That application was also rejected by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by its order dated 23-5-1970.