Article 32 not maintainable against completed income-tax assessments and recovery proceedings; no writ relief granted.

A petition under Article 32 challenging completed income-tax assessments and seeking restraint on recovery and sale of property was held not maintainable. The Court treated the grievance as one relating in substance to tax levy and collection, and held that Article 31(1) did not extend in the manner argued to such taxation matters. It further held that the protection against unlawful tax collection under Article 265 was not directly enforceable through Article 32 as a Part III remedy. On the special facts, the Court also declined discretionary writ relief, and no relief was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution was maintainable for quashing completed income-tax assessment proceedings and for restraining recovery and sale of properties on the ground of infringement of fundamental rights.

Analysis: The proceedings before the Income-tax Investigation Commission had concluded long before the petition was filed, and the assessment orders under the income-tax law had already been made. The Court held that Article 32 could not be invoked in the circumstances, since the grievance related in substance to levy and collection of tax and the constitutional protection in Article 31(1) did not extend to such taxation matters in the manner contended. The Court also noted that the right against unlawful tax collection under Article 265 was not itself enforceable under Part III through Article 32, and that, in the special facts, no discretionary writ relief ought to be granted.

Conclusion: The petition under Article 32 was not maintainable and no writ relief was granted.

---