T.K.Basu, J. - (1.) In this application the petitioner, The Hong-Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, challenges several notices issued under section 148 read with Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), covering assessment years 1950-51 to 1960-61. The notices are impugned on the usual ground that there was no omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts relevant for its assessment during the respective assessment years and consequently the notices are without jurisdiction and void,
(2.) The facts which are relevant for the purpose of appreciating this contention may be briefly noted.
(3.) The petitioner-bank is a world-wide organisation having its branches in several countries including India, the United Kingdom and the United States. Being an exchange bank there are certain expenses which are incurred in the United Kingdom and the United States offices of the bank which can be said to be referable to transactions which, originated in India. In the course of the assessment for the assessment year 1950-51, for the first time the petitioner claimed a deduction of a proportion of the expenses of its head office, London office and the U.S.A. offices, respectively, referable to the Indian offices. It appears from paragraph 5 of the petition that upon such claim being made, one K. N. Banerjee, the then Income-tax Officer, had various discussions with the petitioner's representatives both verbally as well as in writing. The Income-tax Officer called for and the petitioner submitted various details in support of the petitioner's claim including the break-ups of the relative expenses, the Indian Offices' profit and loss account and balance-sheet as well as the world profit and loss account and balance-sheet and all other documents and information asked for. The relevant correspondence starts with a letter dated the 22nd January, 1951, written by the Income-tax Officer to the manager of the petitioner raising this specific question and ending with the letter of the petitioner to the Income-tax Officer dated the 19th April, 1951, dealing with this aspect of the matter and are to be collectively found in exhabit B to the petition It appears that this question was gone into in considerable detail between the Income-tax Officer and the representatives of the petitioner-company which according to paragraph 6 of the petition were one Mr. G.R. Crooks of Messrs. Price, Waterhouse, Peat & Co., Chartered Accountants, and one Mr. E.C. Hutchinson, an officer of the petitioner.;