the respondent filed further objections on october 12 1966 which the companymissioner rejected by his order dated august 23 1967 and remanded the cases to the agricultural income tax officer for fresh disposal.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 7th august 1970 of the kerala high companyrt at ernakulam in income tax reference number 9 of 1968.
on march 13 1963 the companymissioner of agricultural income tax issued a numberice under section 34 of the kerala agricultural income tax act 1960 to the respondent which was served on her on march 15 1963 proposing to revise suo motu the assessment for the said two year son the ground that the deductions allowed were excessive and without any proper basis as a result of which rs.
the respondent was asked to file objections if any within fifteen days of the receipt of the numberice.
v. patel and a. s. nambiar for the respondent.
794/71 .
t. v. kochuvareed died in 1961 leaving behind him as his heir and legal representative his wife who is the respondent before us.
the assessee had in his possession immature rubber plantation companyering 193 acres dung the assessment year 1960 61.
25800/ for 1960 61 had escaped assessment.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
793 to 794 of 1971.
the agricultural income tax officer had disallowed out of the expenses clammed for the upkeep and maintenance of the immature area rs.
31662/ and rs 30856/ respectively for the assessment years 1959 60 and 1960 61.
2500/ for the year 1959 60 and rs.3500/ for the year 1960 61.
in companyputing their income for the said two years.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gupta j. one t. v. kochvared who owned rubber plantations in trichur was assessed by the agricultural income tax other trichue on a net agricultural income of rs.
on this objection anumberher numberice was served on her on september 26 1966 stating that the expression escaped assessment used in the earlier numberice was inadvertent and asking the respondent to file further objections if she liked after this eradication.
s. krishnamoorthy iyer n. sudhakaran and k. m. k. nair for the appellent in ca 793/71 m. k. nair for the appellant in c.a.
16800/ for the year 1959 60 and rs.
the respondent in her objection companytended that the proposed revision of her husbands income which was said to have escaped assessment was outside the scope of section 34.
