S.C.Mital, J. - (1.) The question for determination before this Bench is, whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, reference by the Income-tax Officer to the Valuation Officer to ascertain the value of the mill in question at the relevant time, is valid.
(2.) The salient facts are that somewhere in 1970 and May 1971 M/s. Jindal Strips Limited, hereinafter referred to as the Company, constructed strip-skelp mill shed, hereinafter referred to as the mill on its premises in Hissar. For the year ending 31st December, 1971 (Assessment Year 1972-73), the Company in its return valued the mill at Rs. 15,30,064.34. p. The valuation was accepted by the Income-tax Officer, who then dealt with the case, by his order dated 7th January, 1974. For the subsequent Assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75 the above-said value of the mill was repeated, with due depreciation being shown. The Income-tax Officers concerned in their orders dated 16th February, 1976, and 2nd March, 1976, accepted the valuation. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the above-said three years are complete in all respects.
(3.) For the Assessment Year 1975-76, the return filed by the Company on 29th August, 1975, was pending when on 26th November, 1976, the Income-tax Officer (Respondent No. 1) purporting to act under Section 55-A of the Income- tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, wrote to the valuation Officer (Respondent No. 2) to evaluate the mill for the Assessment Year 1971-73. By his letter dated 6th December, 1976 (Annexure P. 3), the Valuation Officer asked the Company to supply, inter alia, complete set of the drawings of the property, balance sheet and profit' and loss account from the date of inception of the Company till 31st December, 1972. With a view to evaluate the mill, on 1st March, 1977, the Valuation Officer visited the premises of the Company. The Company did not object to it. Thereafter, letters dated 9th and 15th March, 1978 (Annexures P. 5 and P. 6) were received by the Company from the Valuation Officer requiring the Company to produce vouchers of the expense incurred in the construction of the mill for the relevant period and certain other information for revaluating the same. At that stage, by its reply (Annexure P.7), the Company objected to the authority of the Valuation Officer to ask for the above said information on the ground that the assessment proceedings for the years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75 being complete, there was no occasion for the Company to comply with the demand of the Valuation Officer. Since he insisted upon compliance with the directions contained in the two letters mentioned above, the Company filed the present writ petition challenging the authority of the Income-tax Officer to seek the assistance of the Valuation Officer in the exercise of his power under Section 55-A of the Act. Before proceeding further, it may he mentioned that the proceedings for the Assessment year 1975-76 concluded during the pendency of this writ. petition. Learned counsel for the company made a passing reference to the assessment order but did not consider it necessary, for the, decision of the writ petition, to place a copy thereof on record.;