2013 (4) TMI 587

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....., It,R.K.Upadhyaya ORDER This writ petition has been preferred by twenty wealth tax assessees under the Wealth Tax Act, who have been assessed individually by separate assessment orders relating to the Assessment Year 2010-2011. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although all these petitioners have been assessed individually by separate assessment orders but as they are....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., a copy whereof is on page 88 of the paper book, stating that no basis has been mentioned in the notice for the amount of proposed wealth tax. Ultimately, the sole respondent passed the impugned assessment orders all dated 29th of March, 2013 filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. At the very outset, Shri Bharat Ji Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents, raised a preliminary ob....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onsideration to the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners. But it is difficult to agree with him. Repeatedly, a query was put to the learned counsel for the petitioners to point out prejudice, if any, has been caused to the petitioners even assuming for the sake of argument that in the impugned assessment orders the relevant section 16(5) should have been mentioned in pl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n or null and void as a wrong section finds mention in the impugned assessment orders. The point raised by the petitioners is more technical in nature than substantial one. In the case of United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon and others (supra), the Apex Court has laid down that in all such cases of tax matters, the court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the C....