Ajit K.Sengupta, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the order passed on November 20, 1991, by the court of the first instance dismissing the writ application in which the appellant challenged the notice dated December 26, 1990, issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Upon receipt of the same, the assessee wanted to know the reasons recorded before the said notice under Section 148 was issued.
(2.) The reasons which have been recorded by the Income-tax Officer in issuing the notice run as follows : "26-12-1990 : The assessee filed his return of income on October 20, 1989, showing an income of Rs. 22,100 and an assessment was made under Section 143(1)(a) on July 2, 1990 as per return so filed. Now, it is noted that the assessee had an income of Rs. 1,59,047 within the meaning of Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, representing the value of jewellery, etc., vide order under Section 132(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated September 28, 1989 in the case of the assessee relating to this assessment year which has escaped assessment for failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of his total income for the assessment year. In consequence of the above information, f have reasons to believe that the assessee's income for the assessment year has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Issue notice under Section 148."
(3.) The factual background in which the contentions are raised by Mr. Bhattacharjee, counsel for the petitioner, against the initiation of the proceeding under Section 147 read with Section 148 is that the Income-tax Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and such completion was not followed by initiation of proceedings for scrutiny of the case under Section 143(2), On the legal plane, he contends that the completion of assessment under Section 143(1)(a) coupled with the expiration of the period of limitation for invoking the provisions of Section 143(2) precludes the Assessing Officer from issuing a notice under Section 148. The allegation that the income has escaped assessment is of no consequence and Section 147 cannot be availed of, he submits. In other words, his contention is that, on the construction of the provisions of Section 143(1)(a), it would be clear that an assessment made under that section necessarily excludes the scope of reassessment on the ground of escapement of income from assessment. Escapement of income originating in such assessment is contended to be remediable only by recourse to Section 143(2) read with Section 143(3). If this construction is accepted, it amounts to construing the provisions of Section 143(1)(a) as a provision immunising the assessee from reassessment once and for all. Such a view is not acceptable. It is not warranted by the scheme of the Act. That apart, no construction which disables the taxing machinery and lets the assessee get away with not paying tax to the extent due should be adopted. If there be any element of non-disclosure in the assessment under Section 143(1)(a), the Revenue will be within its legitimate right to bring the undisclosed income to tax. The contention of Mr. Bhattacharjee, if accepted, would amount to saying that reassessment is limited only to non-disclosure in the process of making assessment after enquiries under Section 143(2) read with Section 143(3). Simply because the return of the assessee has been accepted without scrutiny and in good faith, the Assessing Officer is not precluded from initiating a proceeding satisfying the conditions therefor where the income has escaped assessment. There is nothing either in Section 143 or in Section 147 that can support such a view. The provisions of a tax statute should be interpreted in a manner leading to the result that everybody pays his due tax.;