RAJABALLY HIRJI MEGHANI Vs. S N SAHANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was assessed to income -tax for the assessment year 1971 -72 by an assessment order dated March 27, 1974. On September 30, 1974, the appellant was given notice under section 148 of the Income -tax Act, 1961, of the proposed reopening of his assessment for the said assessment year. On November 29, 1975, the appellant wrote to his Income -tax Officer protesting against the proposed reopening. He asked the Income -tax Officer to furnish him with the grounds for the same. On that day, he also filed a return as required by the notice under section 148, but under protest.

(2.) NOTHING transpired until January 17, 1980, when the Income -tax Officer wrote to the appellant on the subject of the reopening of his assessment under section 147(a) of the Income -tax Act, 1961, for the said assessment year. He stated that after the assessment for that year had been made, the Income -tax Department came to know that loans shown by the appellant were not genuine; that one J. K. Thakkar had merely lent his name to show that a loan had been received from him, though he had not given it. The Department had, therefore, reason to believe that the amount of the loans represented the appellant's own unexplained money and that his income had escaped assessment because he had failed to furnish full, true and correct particulars of his income at the time of the original assessment. Accordingly, the assessment had been reopened under section 147(a) by issue of a notice under section 148 of the Income -tax Act, 1961. Along with the letter, the Income -tax Officer had enclosed notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the said Act and a summons for personal attendance under section 131. On February 15, 1980, the appellant wrote to the Income -tax Officer a long letter in which he again asked to be furnished with the grounds recorded by the Income -tax Officer before the notice under section 148 was issued. On February 23, 1980, the Income -tax Officer informed the appellant of the grounds. They were recorded thus :

(3.) ON March 4, 1980, the appellant filed a writ petition impugning the notice under section 148 of the Income -tax Act, 1961, the notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the said Act and the summons under section 131. The writ petition was heard and disposed of by the learned single judge on December 22, 1983. The learned judge dismissed the writ petition in so far as it concerned the notice under section 148 on the ground of delay. He quashed the notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) and the summons under section 131. This appeal filed by the original petitioner assails the judgment and order of the learned judge in so far as they rejected his contentions in regard to the notice under section 148.