M.C. Agarwal, J. - (1.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a partnership firm, registered under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), challenges a notice dated February 3, 1982, a copy of which is annexure "15" to the writ petition, issued by the Assessing Officer, namely, the Income-tax Officer, Budaum, under Section 185 of the Act requiring the petitioner to show cause why its registration for the assessment years 1974-75 to 1979-80 be not cancelled.
(2.) WE have heard Sri Vikram Gulati, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Ashok Kumar, learned standing counsel for the respondent. The petitioner, as stated above, is a partnership firm in which one of the partners is Sri Arvind Kumar Gupta. He invested certain funds in the firm as his capital and explained that a part thereof was received by him from his uncle, Sri Harsh Nandan Gupta. This explanation was not believed and it was assumed by the Department that the funds actually came from Sri Virendra Pal Gupta, the father of the said Arvind Kumar Gupta. The impugned notice was issued by the Assessing Officer stating that the funds actually belonged to Virendra Pal Gupta and there was reason to believe that Arvind Kumar Gupta was benamidar of Virendra Pal Gupta. The petitioner filed this writ petition and by an order dated March 17, 1982, this court stayed further proceedings in pursuance of the impugned notice dated February 3, 1982. No counter-affidavit has been filed.
(3.) A supplementary affidavit was filed by the petitioner annexing therewith a copy of the Tribunal's order for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 to show that the additions that were made to the income of Virendra Pal Gupta on account of the investment by Arvind Kumar Gupta in the petitioner firm have been deleted by the Tribunal holding that Harsh Nandan Gupta from whom Arvind Kumar Gupta claimed to have received the amounts as gifts had the source of gifting the money to him. In the supplementary counter-affidavit filed to the supplementary affidavit it has been stated that there were three additions of Rs. 17,100, Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 3,000 out of which the first and the third only have been deleted by the Tribunal and the second one of Rs. 5,000 has not been considered by it.;