NAR HARI KRISHAN VAID Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT T.S. DOABIA, J. : Facts on the basis of which argument raised are found mentioned in para 6 of the petition. This para is reproduced below :

(2.) FURTHER fact which is highlighted is that a sum of Rs. 77,102 stands already assessed for the asst. yr. 1990-91. It is submitted that when an appeal was preferred before the ITO, Ward-2, Jammu, he included the amount of Rs. 77,102 in the asst. yr. 1989-90. It is submitted that this was not correctly done. This is because this amount stood assessed for the asst. yr. 1990-91. It is submitted that when declaration was filed in terms of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, this fact was mentioned. Somehow or other this has not been noticed. The petitioner wants this aspect of the matter to be rectified. For this, reliance is being placed on the decision in Coverage & Consultants Ltd. vs. Union of India (2001) 169 CTR (MP) 217 : (2001) 250 ITR 289 (MP). In the above case it was concluded as under :