GOVIND BALLABH PARIKH Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, in the matter of notice dated February 6, 1985, served on the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), for the assessment year 1980-81, the petitioner has challenged the impugned notice on the ground that no reasons have been disclosed by the assessing authority as to what was the basis on which the notice was sent to the petitioner and in the absence of disclosure of reasons, the petitioner was not bound by the notice. Shri Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that for the assessment year 1980-81, the late Shri Balkishan Pareek, advocate, submitted his return disclosing income from property, income from profession and income from other sources well within time. The assessment of the petitioner was completed on January 12, 1981, on a sum of Rs. 14,115 as per return and a sum of Rs. 510 was refunded to the assessee on July 19, 1980, as excess advance tax. which was paid. The original assessment order dated January 12, 1981, has been referred to as annexure 1 to the writ petition.

(2.) ON February 6, 1985, the non-petitioner issued notice mentioning therein that he has reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1980-81 had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 148 of the Act, and it is proposed to "reassess the income and that the petitioner was further required to file the challan in the prescribed form within 30 days from the date of the receipt of the notice for the assessment year in question. The petitioner received the said notice on February 12, 1985, vide annexure 2.

(3.) SHRI Mehta has also placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the matter of Madhya Pradesh Industries Ltd. v. ITO [1965] 57 ITR 637, in which the apex court has held as under (headnote) :