Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. - (1.) On December 2, 2003, I heard the matter in the absence of the learned Additional Solicitor General, Mr. S.K. Kapoor, and passed an order directing to file affidavits and to continue interim order for a period of eight weeks after X-mas vacation or until further order whichever is earlier. On the same day at the request of Mr. Kapoor, I agreed to hear the matter on the subsequent days without recalling the above order. I made clear to learned counsel that in the event the submission and argument of learned Additional Solicitor General warranted vacating and modification or recalling of my order dated December 1, 2003, I might do so.
(2.) As such the matter was heard on December 5, 2003, and December 9, 2003, respectively.
(3.) The learned Additional Solicitor General contends that this application should be dismissed in limine, if not possible at this stage then the interim order granted by this court should be vacated. He says the notice issued by the officer is not justiciable as in exercise of statutory power he has issued, because he has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the assessment year of 1999-2000. The formation of opinion of the officer's reason to believe is his subjective satisfaction. Necessary permission has been obtained from the Commissioner of Income-tax. Not only is the Assessing Officer satisfied, the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax concerned is also satisfied with the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer that the same are sufficient to issue such notice. This court should not examine the correctness, sufficiency, and adequacy of the reasons in exercise of power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.;