1974 (6) TMI 29

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ciation allowance there was no appeal. After the appeal was disposed of by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, the Income-tax Officer realised that the depreciation allowance allowed by him at the time of assessment was excessive. He therefore, issued a notice under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the mistake alleged to have been committed by him earlier should not be rectified. The petitioner challenged the said notice in Writ Petition No. 2183 of 1968 on the file of this court. In the course of the said proceedings, it was submitted on behalf of the revenue that the notice should be treated as one issued under section 35 of the 1922 Act as it was permissible to d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 147 after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable or the expiry of one year from the date of service of the notice under section 148, whichever was later. It is not disputed that any action taken under section 147(b) of the 1961 Act would have been barred by time when the notice was issued in this case for purposes of rectification of the order of assessment. On these facts, it is argued that any action taken under section 35 of the 1922 Act for rectiying the mistake referred to above would be violative of article 14 of the Constitution. It is the common case of the parties before me that the error in question was capable of being corrected either under section 35 of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dealing with an action taken under section 5 of the Taxation on Income (Investigation Commission) Act, 1947. In that case the assessee against whom action was taken under section 5 of the said Act contended before the Supreme Court that in view of section 34 of the 1922 Act (which was similar to section 147 of the 1961 Act) which was also applicable to his case, the impugned action was liable to be struck down under article 14 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court upheld the said contention by pointing out that section 34 of the 1922 Act was also applicable to the case of the assessee before it and that by having recourse to section 5 of the Taxation on Income (Investigation Commission) Act, 1947, the assessee was deprived of his right of ....