226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad for quashing the order of assessment and the numberice issued pursuant thereto.
Mr. S. P. Varma, learned companynsel for the appellant companytended that i the respondents right to assess the appellant to tax was barred by limitation and, therefore, the Act companyld number have the effect of reviving the said right and ii the amount of malikhana companyld number be in law the subject matter of assessment.
On an application filed by the appellant, the Collector by his order dated May 9, 1956, revoked his earlier order and directed the Additional Collector to proceed to assess the appellant in accordance with law.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated March 1, 1961 of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal No.
That Ordinance was later replaced by the U.P. Agricultural Income tax Amendment Act 14 of 1956.
The, Collector quashed those proceedings by his order dated November 26, 1955.
The Collector reviewed the order and set aside the same.
After the amending Act was passed, within 90 days therefrom the appropriate income tax authority had filed an application before the Collector to review his order.
The result was that the proceedings before the Additional Collector were restored.
The second point was number raised in the High Court.
The petition was heard, in the first instance, by Tandon J., who dismissed the same with companyts.
Thereupon, the Additional Collector resumed proceedings and on June 7, 1956, passed a fresh assessment order imposing a tax of Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On August 7, 1956, the appellant filed a petition under Art.
205 of 1958.
799 of 1963.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Subba Rao J. This appeal by special leave raises the ques tion of the scope of the retrospective operation of the U.P. Agricultural Income tax Amendment Act, 1956 U.P. Act No.
The appeal preferred by the appellant against that order to a Division Bench was also dismissed.
B. Agarwala, O. P. Rana and Atiqur Rehman, for the respondents.
14 of 1956 .
P. Varmaa for the appellant.
On February 9, 1956, U.P. Agricultural Income tax Amendment Ordinance, 1956 2 of 1956 was passed enacting that the word Collector shall always be deemed to include Additional Collector.
The facts are simple and they are as follows On January 10, 1953, for the assessment year 1952 53, the Additional Collector, Banaras, assessed the appellant to agricultural income tax under the U.P. Agricultural Income tax Act, 1948 P. Act 3 of 1949 .
Hence the present appeal.
42,761 on the appellant, and on July 4, 1956, he issued a numberice to the appellant for payment of the tax.
