TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (1) TMI 2
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istered office at London. It carries on banking business in India, and is assessed under the I.T. Act, 1961. The appellant filed a return of its income for the assessment year 1972-73. During the assessment proceeding, the ITO issued a notice under s. 142(1) of the I.T. Act requiring the appellant to produce certain account books and documents. The appellant applied against the notice to the High Court at Calcutta under art. 226 of the Constitution. A learned single judge of the High Court did not accept the wide construction which the appellant sought to put upon the impugned notice, and construing it in specific limited terms he directed the appellant to comply with it. The appellant preferred an appeal to the High Court. Meanwhile, purs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....king the assessment order. On the same date March 17, 1975, the learned single judge granted an interim injunction restraining the ITO from proceeding with the assessment, and on March 25, 1975, the injunction was made operative for the pendency of the writ petition. The writ petition was disposed of by the learned single judge by his judgment dated August 31, 1976. It is apparent that the assessment proceedings remained stayed throughout the period from March 17, 1975, to August 31, 1976, by virtue of the orders of the court. As has been mentioned, the learned single judge disposed of the writ petition on August 31, 1976. In his judgment, besides directing the appellant to comply with the notice under s. 142(1) as construed by him, he also....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 153, the period during which the assessment is stayed by an order or injunction of any court shall be excluded, it is abundantly clear that the assessment order dated March 31, 1977, is not barred by limitation. In computing the period for making the assessment, the ITO would be entitled to exclude the entire period from March 17, 1975, on which date there were fourteen days still left within the normal operation of the rule of limitation. The assessment order was made on the very first day after the period of stay expired ; it could not be faulted on the ground of limitation. There is, therefore, no force in the submission of the appellant that the limitation for making the assessment had expired and a valuable right not to be assessed h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court, there is no revival at all. But although in the former kind of case the High Court, after quashing the offending order, does not substitute its own order, it has power none the less to pass such further orders as the justice of the case requires. When passing such orders the High Court draws on its inherent power to make all such orders as are necessary for doing complete justice between the parties. The interests of justice require that any undeserved or unfair advantage gained by a party invoking the jurisdiction of the court, by the mere circumstance that it has initiated a proceeding in the court, must be neutralised. The simple fact of the institution of litigation by itself should not be permitted to confer an advantage on the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lainly right in making the direction which it did. The observations of this court in Director of Inspection of Income-tax (Investigation), New Delhi v. Pooran Mal & Sons [1974] 96 ITR 390 at 395, are relevant. It said: " The court in exercising its powers under article 226 has to mould the remedy to suit the facts of a case. If in a particular case a court takes the view that the Income-tax Officer, while passing an order under section 132(5), did not give an adequate opportunity to the party concerned it should not be left with the only option of quashing it and putting the party at an advantage even though it may be satisfied that on the material before him the conclusion arrived at by the Income-tax Officer was correct or dismissing th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....awn to a recent decision of this court in Rajinder Nath v. CIT (Civil Appeals Nos. 1864-69/72 decided on August 13, 1979, by a Bench of this court of which one of us was a member) [1979] 120 ITR 14. In that case, the court considered the provisions of s. 153(3)(ii) of the I.T. Act and laid down that the word " direction " in that sub-section refers to a direction necessary for the disposal of the case and which the court has power to make while deciding the case. In the view taken by us that the order made by the High Court directing a fresh assessment is necessary for properly and completely disposing of the writ petition, the appellant can obtain no assistance from the decision in Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC). Mr. A. P. Mo....