TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (10) TMI 28
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss of purchase and sale of hides and skins. The only source of income of the petitioners is the share income from the firm. While the assessment for the assessment year 1987-88 was completed by the Assessing Officer, the assessment for the assessment years 1986-87 and 1988-89 were pending. Against the completed assessment relating to the assessment year 1987-88 there was an appeal pending before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). At the above stage, the firm had moved a settlement petition on September 25, 1991, before the Settlement Commission, Madras, for settling the case of the firm by determining its income on an estimated basis. The Assessing Officer passed the assessment orders in respect of the firm on December 7, 1993, relat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....48 of the Act ex parte assessments will be made in the case of the petitioners on the basis of the materials available. Copies of the letters are marked as exhibits P-15 and P-16. The original petition was filed for a declaration that reassessment proceedings initiated as per exhibits P-9 to P-12 are illegal and without jurisdiction and to quash exhibits P-9 to P-14 and for other reliefs. The main ground taken is that the notices, exhibits P-9 to P-14 are against the provisions of the Act and beyond the jurisdiction of the officer. The notices issued earlier already got barred by time. According to the petitioners, notice of reassessment can be issued only once and having issued notices on March 21, 1994, and served them on the petitioners....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issued for a second time since, by virtue of the provisions of section 153(2), the proceedings initiated as per notices under section 148 issued on March 21, 1994, as per exhibits P-5 to P-8 already got time barred on March 31, 1996". The Department contended that the issue of notices under section 148 of the Act and its follow up action at each time, have to be treated as a separate compartment. The fact that no assessment could be made by the Department on the basis of the notices under section 148 dated March 21, 1994, does not debar the Department from issuing notices under section 148 a second time. The time limit for issuing of notices under section 148 is dealt with in section 149 of the Act. In the instant case, sub-clause (iii) of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hibits P-13 and P-14, respectively, asking the petitioners to file returns and documents. Two other notices dated August 27, 1997, and September 19, 1997 (exhibits P-15 and P-16), were also issued to the petitioners posting the assessments for final hearing. The question to be decided is as to whether the second notice under section 148 issued on March 25, 1997, is legal and valid". The learned single judge decided to consider the question whether the notices, exhibits P-9 to P-12, issued were hit by the provisions of section 149(1) of the Act. Under the provisions of section 149(1), no notice under section 148 shall be issued in cases falling under clause (a) of section 147 for the relevant assessment year if eight years have elapsed from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....satisfied. The learned judge also took the view that if an assessment is pending either by way of original assessment or by way of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer cannot issues a notice under section 148 of the Act, but if no proceedings are pending either by way of original assessment or by way of reassessment, he can issue a notice under section 148 within the time limit. Thus, the learned judge came to the conclusion that the reassessment proceedings for the year 1988-89 was valid and for the year 1986-87 was quashed. It is against that this writ appeal is filed. Learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Raveendranatha Menon, contended that the learned single judge was correct in holding that there is no bar in issuing a se....