1993 (7) TMI 5

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... net wealth. In pursuance of an order dated February 11, 1980, passed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the records relating to the petitioner's assessment were transferred to the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, Bombay. The assets of the Hindu undivided family comprised, inter alia, interest in the partnership firm of Juggilal Kamlapat Bankers, Kanpur. The petitioner complains that the Wealth-tax Officer did not complete the assessment as required under the provisions of law. On April 12, 1984, six notices were served upon the petitioner by the Wealth-tax Officer calling upon him to attend the office in connection with certain points with the returns submitted for the assessment years 1967-68 to 1972-73. The petitioner filed the pre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court to challenge the reference made under section 16A of the Act. The Allahabad High Court (see [1979] 116 ITR 646) dismissed the writ petition and thereupon the firm and Padampat Singhania preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court of India to challenge the legality of the order dated October 4, 1977, passed by the Allahabad High Court. The Supreme Court entertained the appeal and on August 21, 1978, passed the following order restraining the Wealth-tax Officer from proceeding with the assessment : " Interim injunction restraining the Wealth-tax Officer from making order of assessment as also the Valuation Officer from making a report to the Wealth-tax Officer, though the Valuation Officer ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Jetley, learned counsel appearing on be half of the Department, submitted that in computing the period of limitation, the period during which the assessment proceedings are stayed by an order of injunction of any court is required to be excluded in accordance with Explanation 1 to section 17A of the Act. Shri Jetley submits and in our judgment with considerable merit, that as the Supreme Court has restrained the Wealth-tax Officer, Allahabad, from making the order of assessment in pursuance of the valuation report sought from the Valuation Officer, it was incumbent upon the Wealth-tax Officer, Bombay, to withhold the completion of the assessment. On behalf of the petitioners, it was claimed that the order passed by the Supreme Court merely....