1983 (2) 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

....r art. 226 of the Constitution, M/s. Hiralal and Sons, a firm registered under the I.T. Act, 1961, has assailed an order dated March 20, 1979 (annexure " I " to the writ petition), in so far as it related to an adjustment of Rs. 2,02,931 towards the alleged tax liability of one Hiralal Mithal (in his individual capacity) who was, at one time, a partner of the petitioner from the amount due to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....spondents is that the refund was in respect of assessment for the years during which Hiralal Mithal was admittedly partner and that it was open to the department, therefore, to adjust part of the amount Of refund against the income-tax liabilities of Hiralal Mithal. It has been suggested that the petitioner firm could be required to pay to the I.T. Department dues of Hiralal Mithal by recourse to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r refund by virtue of an order passed by the I.T. Tribunal in the year 1978. In a supplementary rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, detailed explanation has been offered in regard to the claim of the petitioner that the demand made through the notice issued to the petitioner firm in the year 1976 under s. 226(3) of the Act has been fully adjusted. It has also been mentioned that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fore the authority before an order of adjustment is finally passed. From the facts noticed earlier and those asserted in the affidavits exchanged between the parties, it is amply borne out that before the impugned order of adjustment was passed, no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner firm to have its say in the matter. It is obvious that the petitioner can legitimately urge that prejudice h....