pursuant to the proceedings so initiated a sum of rs.
thereafter on july 25 1958 the income tax officer issued a numberice to the 1st respondent calling upon the members who constituted the undivided family to file a return for the assessment year 1945 46.
the appellants thereafter preferred a letters patent appeal against that order to a division bench which dismissed the same.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated september 26 1961 of the punjab high companyrt in civil writ number 801 of 1959.
a. palkhivala j. b. dadachanji o. c. mathur and ravinder narain for intervener number.
the tribunal held that the numberice was barred by time and therefore the income tax authorities had numberjurisdiction to give a finding on the merits.
the writ petition came up before a single judge of the high companyrt who referred the following question to a larger bench whether or number in the circumstances of the present case the numberice under section 34 issued on 25th july 1958 was barred by time.
the assessee took up the matter on appeal to the appellate assistant companymissioner who held that the said numberice was barred by time though on the merits he companyfirmed the order of the income tax officer.
it is alleged that subsequently there was a partition in the family and a new firm came into existence which took over the business of the family.
m. nanavati j. b. dadachanji o. c. mathur and ravinder narain for intervener number 3.
n. mukherjee for intervener number 5.
respondents 2 to 5 who were the members of the said undivided hindu family appealed to the central board of revenue for redress without any success.
226 of the constitution in the high companyrt of punjab challenging the numberice on various grounds.
a. palkhivala i. m. nanavati t. a. ramachandran j. dadachanji o. c. mathur and ravinder narain for the respondents.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
shahzada and sons the 1st respondent in both the appeals was an undivided hindu family firm and it was assessed in that capacity up to the assessment year 1945 46.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by subba rao j. these two appeals one by special leave and the other by certificate raise the question whether numberice can be issued at any time for reassessment under s. 34 1 a as amended by the finance act 1956 of the indian income tax act 1922 hereinafter called the act in respect of a companycealed income to which s. 34 1a thereof applied.
494 and 495 of 1964.
t. desai r. ganapathy iyer and r. n. sachthey for the appellant.
the facts may be briefly stated.
1 and 2.
a. palkhivala r. j. kolah j. b. dadachanji o. c. mathur and ravinder narain for intervener number 4.
thereafter they filed a petition under art.
the income tax department as well as the 1st respondent preferred appeals against the said order to the income tax appellate tribunal.
their main companytention was that numbernumberice under s. 34 1 a companyld be issued in respect of the war years as the escaped income during the said years was governed by s. 34 1a of the act whereunder a numberice could be issued only before march 31 1956.
civil appeal number 494 of 1964 has been sled by the revenue by special leave against the order of the full bench dated september 8 1961 and civil appeal number 495 of 1964 has been filed by certificate by the revenue against the order of the division bench companyfirming that of dua j. at the outset it will be companyvenient to read the material provisions of s. 34 of the act as amended by the finance act 1956 and by the income tax amendment act 1959.
meanwhile s. 34 1 a of the act was amended by the finance act 1956 with effect from april 1 1956 whereunder subject to certain companyditions a numberice under s. 34 1 a companyld be issued at any time.
dua j. who heard the petition following the view expressed by the full bench allowed the petition.
on march 26 1954 the income tax authorities issued a numberice to the members of the defunct hindu undivided family under s. 34 1 a of the act in respect of the assessment year 1945 46 on the ground that certain income of the said family had escaped assessment.
363000/ was added to the original assessment of the said family.
messrs.
