TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1971 (9) TMI 22
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he decision of the High Court of Punjab. The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellants primarily on the ground that they had adequate alternative remedy under the income-tax law. The father of the appellant, Seth Multani Mal Modi, was a shareholder in the Modi Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. On March 5, 1956, that company declared interim dividends to its shareholders. Und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ruary 10, 1958. In appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that that income was not taxable in the assessment year 1956-57, but it was taxable in the assessment year 1957-58. The Tribunal upheld that decision. The resulting position was that dividend income stood excluded from the income for assessment for the year 1956-57 but at the same time it had not been taken into consideration in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellate Assistant Commissioner set aside the assessment made, by his order dated June 15, 1963, on the ground that the notice issued under section 34(1)(b) had not been served on appellant No. 2 and that it was necessary to issue notices to all the legal representatives of Multani Mal Modi. He directed that the Income-tax Officer may proceed to assess the assessees in accordance with law. On Apri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. There is no dispute that when the 1961 Act came into force, the proceedings initiated under section 34(1)(b) of the 1922 Act were pending. That being so, it was not open to the Income-tax Officer to issue notices under section 148 of the 1961 Act. (See our decision in Civil Appeal No. 1981 of 1968 delivered today). Mr. B. Sen, learned counsel for the department, contended that in view of se....