27000/ for the year 1953 54 and to rs.
on such failure to pay the income tax officer sometime in september 1955 sent certificates to the deputy companymissioner kolar under s. 46 2 of the act for recovery of the tax as arrears of land revenue and the latter in the companyrse of the same month attached various properties of the assessee under the revenue recovery act.
61000/ and the tax levied was rs.
138 and 139 of 1956.
against the orders passed by the high companyrt the income tax officer has appealed to this companyrt with special leave.
the deputy companymissioner attached certain properties belonging to the respondent.
after the assessment was made the incometax officer sent numberices of demand asking the assessee to pay rs.
numberfresh numberices of demand were issued against him in respect of the reduced tax he was number in default.
it appears that the assessee took further appeals to the income tax appellate tribunal and the matter was said to be pending there.
226 of the constitution for quashing the recovery proceedings as invalid with the result earlier mentioned.
for the assessment year 1953 54 the assessees income was estimated to be rs.
the assessee filed further appeals against the orders of the appellate companymissioner and asked that the recovery proceedings might be stayed pending decision of these appeals and on that request being rejected moved the high court of mysore by two petitions under art.
19808 1 0.
the assessee applied under s. 27 of the income tax act for the cancellation of these assessments but his applications were rejected.
it appears that thereafter on february 19 1956 the income tax officer informed the assessee that his tax liability for 1953 54 had reduced to rs.
shah j. the income tax officer kolar circle kolar assessed seghu buchiah setty respondent in this appeal to income tax under s. 23 4 of the indian income tax act 1922 for the year 1953 54 on an estimated income of rs.
in appeals filed by the respondent against the orders of assessment the appellate assistant companymissioner reduced the income assessed for the year 1953 54 to rs.
13346 8 0 and called upon him to pay these amounts at once into the local treasury.
the appeals relate to the assessment years 1953 54 and 1954 55 in respect of which assessments were made under s. 23 4 of the incometax act.
on december 17 1955 the appellate assistant companymissioner a range bangalore before whom the assessments were challenged by appeal passed his order and assessed the income for the two years to be rs.
however the appeals were heard at length and i must express my decision on the point mooted before us.
28000 and for the year 1954 55 to rs.
121000 and the tax levied was rs.
226 of the companystitution for quashing the old certificates issued under s. 46 2 by the income tax officer on the ground that as.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated april 16 1959 of the mysore high companyrt in writ petitions number.
for the second year his income was estimated to be rs.
66601 3 0.
the income tax officer did number issue fresh numberices of demand pursuant to the modification in the orders of assessment made by the appellate assistant companymissioner but by his letter dated february 14 1956 informed the respondent that he had to pay tax as reduced by the appel late order.
19808 1 0 was due and that for the other year was rs.
the income tax officer kolar and the companymissioner of income tax bangalore are the appellants before us.
4215 9 0 rs.
13346 8 0 respectively.
46000.
on the respondent failing to companyply with the numberices of demand within the period specified the income tax officer treated the respondent as in default and sent certificates under s. 46 2 of the act to the deputy companymissioner kolar for recovery of the tax determined by the orders of assessment.
221 222 of 1963.
86409 4 0 as tax and on default issued a certificate under s. 46 2 of the act to the collector of kolar district to recover the amount as arrears of land revenue.
28000/ and rs.
4215 9 0 and rs.
46000/ respectively.
45000/ for the year 1954 55 and directed the income tax officer to recompute the tax on the basis of the reduced income and to refund the excess if any collected.
it was stated before us that other proceedings were pending in this behalf but i am number companycerned with them except in so far as a preliminary objection based on those and some other proceedings was made before us to which i shall refer presently.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
61000/ on which a tax of rs.
the high companyrt of mysore held them to be invalid and quashed them.
the assessee seghu buchiah setty who is the respondent is a merchant of srinivaspur kolar district.
thereafter on december 17 1955 the appeals filed by the assessee which were till then pending were decided by the appellate companymissioner.
121000 and served numberices of demand under s. 29 of the act for the tax due under the two orders of assessment.
the respondent did number pay the amount of tax demanded and applied to the high companyrt of mysore under art.
121000/ creating a tax liability of rs.
61000 and for the year 1954 55 on an estimated income of rs.
226 of the companystitution for a writ of certiorari quashing the certificates issued by the income tax officer treating him as in default and a writ of prohibition prohibiting the income tax officer from enforcing the certificates under s. 46 2 of the income tax act.
srinivasan and r. gopalakrishnan for the respondent in the appeals .
the income tax officer did number issue any fresh numberices of demand under s. 29 of the act but wrote a letter demanding the reduced tax for the two years which number stood reduced to rs.
the assessee then applied to the high companyrt under art.
he reduced the assessable income of the assessee to rs.
shah j. delivered a dissenting opinion allowing the appeal.
the tax sought to be realise a became due under two assessment orders passed by an income tax officer on march 23 1955 in respect of the years 1953 54 and 1954 55 finding that the assessees income for the earlier year was rs.
the revenue authorities have number appealed to this companyrt against that decision.
sarkar j. and hidayatullah j. delivered separate opinions dismissing the appeals.
sarkar j. the question in these two appeals is whether certain proceedings for the recovery of tax from the assessee under the income tax act 1922 were invalid and should be quashed as the assessment order on which they were based had been revised in appeal.
the assessee tiled appeals to the appellate assistant commissioner against the assessment orders but did number pay the tax as demanded by the numberices.
d. kharkhanis and r. n. sachthey for the appellants in both the appeals .
it is significant that the reduction in the tax was from eighty six thousand rupees to seventeen thousand rupees.
march 11 1964.
