Prior to 29th June, 1955, he had been assessed to income tax by the Income tax Officer, Special Survey Circle VII, Calcutta.
The No.
It appears, however, that shortly before 19th May, 1955, the Commissioner of Income tax, Hyderabad, made another order under section 5 7A and section 64 5 b of the Act transferring all the cases of the petitioner to the main Income tax Officer, Raichur.
Amritsar, to the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Amritsar.
Petition Nos.
44 of 1956, is a member of the Hindu undivided family carrying on business in the name and style of Messrs. Bhagwan Das Sud Sons and the cases of both these petitioners were transferred to the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Ambala, as above, by the said respective orders.
After the dates of such transfer to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle VI, Delhi, said officer instituted several proceedings against them and the petitioners challenged in these petitions the validity of the said orders of transfer and all the subsequent proceedings including the assessment orders as well as the order levying penalty for number payment of the income tax which had been already assessed prior thereto, on the ground that section 5 7A of the Act was ultra vires the Constitution and all the proceedings which were entertained against the petitioners by the Income tax Officer, Central Circle VI, Delhi, were without jurisdiction and void.
87 of 1956 is Dr. Sarmukh Singh, son of S. Narain Singh.
111 of 1956, which is located at Chheharta near Amritsar.
The petitioner in Petition No.
1, and R. B. Jamuna Das Chowdhury, resident of the same place and erstwhile Karta of the Hindu undivided family, which carried on business in the name and style of Messrs. Pannalal Binjraj, Petitioner No.
These, however, are number material for our purposes, the only order challenged being the order of the Commissioner of Income tax Central, Calcutta dated 27th July, 1946, which was passed under section 5 7A of the Act.
The cases in respect of the assessment years 1950 51, 1951 52 and 1952 53 were pending before that officer and proceedings were taken in companynection with the assessment for those years.
These petitioners also thereupon filed the petition challenging the validity of the order of transfer made by the Commissioner of Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Ambala, thereafter, on the same ground of the ultra vires character of section 5 7A of the Act.
These petitions companycern the assessment of the petitioner to income tax for the respective years 1944 45, 1945 46, 1946 47, 1947 48 and 1948 49.
Shri A. L. Sud, the petitioner in petition No.
They companycern the assessment of the respective assessment years 1950 51, 1951 52, 1952 53, 1953 54 and 1954 55.
The petitioner in each of them is the same individual, one Kalloor Siddanna, who resides and carries on business in Raichur in the State of Hyderabad as companymission agent and distributor of agricultural products.
211 of 1956 to 215 of 1956 These petitions may be described as the Sriram Jhabarmull group.
There were further order dated 15th December, 1947, and sometime in September, 1948, transferring the cases of the petitioner from the Income tax Officer, Central Circle IV, Calcutta, to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle I, Calcutta, and back from him to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle IV, Calcutta.
44 of 1956 and 85 of 1956 The petitioner in Petition No.
86 of 1956 is Sardar Gurdial Singh, son of S. Narain Singh, son of S. Narain Singh.
97 and 97A of 1956 The petitioners and Messrs. Pannalal Binjraj, oil mill owners, merchants and companymission agents, carrying on business at Sahibganj in the district of Santhal Parganas, having their branch at 94, Lower Chitpur Road, Calcutta, petitioner No.
The latter officer companytinued the assessment proceedings and issued numberices under section 22 4 of the Act on 1st July, 1954, 2nd November, 1954, 30th November, 1954, 19th December, 1954, and 11th March, 1955, in respect of the said years of assessment.
Petitions Nos.
Curiously enough, the petitioner challenged both the orders, one dated 21st December, 1953, and the other made sometime in May, 1955, under section 5 7A of the Act and the proceedings companytinued and instituted by the respective officers thereunder as unconstitutional and void on the ground that section 5 7A was ultra vires the Constitution even though ultimately he was being assessed by the main Income tax Officer, Raichur, under the latter order.
158 of 1956 is one Shri Ram Saran Das Kapur, the head and karta of the Hindu undivided family carrying on business outside Ghee Mandi Gate, Amritsar.
1 to the same officer.
The father and the three sons were the directors in the Hidustan Embroidery Mills Private Ltd., petitioner No.
Income tax was first imposed in the Hyderabad State in 1946 by special Act of the Legislature and the petitioner was assessed under the Hyderabad Income tax Act by the Additional Income tax Officer, Raichur, for the assessment years 1948 49 and 1949 50.
Demands were made upon the petitioner for payment of the amount of income tax thus assessed whereupon he filed this petition impeaching the validity of the order of the Central Board of Revenue dated 29th June, 1955, and the proceedings entertained by the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Ambala, on the ground that section 5 7A of the Act was ultra vires the Constitution.
Petitions Nos.
These, however, are number material for our purposes, the only order challenged being the order of the Commissioner of Income tax Central, Calcutta.
On 8th June, 1946, there was a further transfer assigning the cases to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle, Central Circle I, Calcutta, and on 27th July, 1946, orders were passed by the Commissioner of Income tax, Central, Calcutta, under section 5 7A transferring the cases of the petitioner to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle, IV, Calcutta.
Petition No.
These are the orders which are companyplained against as unconstitutional and void invalidating the proceedings which were companytinued and subsequently instituted by the Income tax Officer, Central Circle IV, Calcutta, against the petitioner on the score of the unconstitutionality of section 5 7A of the Act.
88 of 1956 is father, S. Narain Singh, son of S. Basdev Singh.
On 21st December, 1953, however, the Commissioner of Income tax, Hyderabad, issued a numberification under section 5 7A ordering that the case of the petitioner should be transferred from the Additional Income tax Officer, Raichur, to the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Hyderabad.
On 22nd January, 1955, the Central Board of Revenue transferred the cases of petitioner No.
Assessments for the said years were made on 21st March, 1955, and on 24th April, 1955, the petitioner made an application under section 27 of the Act to reopen the assessment for the year 1950 51 as on default under section 23 4 of the Act.
These three are brothers and the petitioner in Petition No.
44 of 1956 is Shri A. L. Sud, the sole proprietor of Messrs. Amritlal Sud Construction who originally belonged to Hoshiarpur district in the State of Punjab but has since 1948 been residing and carrying on business in Calcutta.
The facts which led to the filing of the petitions may be shortly stated.
Petitions Nos.
On 29th June, 1955, the Central Board of Revenue transferred his cast to the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Ambala, and the said officer companytinued the proceedings in the transferred case and also instituted further proceedings against the petitioner and assessed him under section 23 4 of the Act for the assessment years 1946 47 and 1947 48.
86 of 1956, 87 of 1956, 88 of 1956, III of 1956, 112 of 1956, and 158 of 1956 These petitions may be companypendiously described as the Amritsar group.
1 in Petition No.
The petitioner in Petition No.
As from 1st April, 1950, the Indian Income tax Act was applied to Hyderabad but the Additional Income tax Officer, Raichur, companytinued to assess the petitioner.
His case also which, prior to the order companyplained against, was being entertained by the Income tax Officer, F Ward, Amritsar, was transferred on some date in 1954 by an order of the Commissioner of Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Amritsar.
All these petitioners were, prior to the orders of transfer made by the Commissioner of Income tax Officer A Ward, Amritsar, but their cases were transferred on or about June 29, 1953, from the Income tax Officer, A Ward.
Petitions Nos.
225 of 1956 to 229 of 1956 these petitions may be classed as the Raichur group.
Prior to the orders of the Commissioner of Income tax under section 5 7A of the Act companyplained against, the petitioner was being assessed by the Income tax Officer, Jalpaiguri, Darjeeling.
It may be numbered, however, that these orders were all prior to the Constitution and having been made on 27th July, 1946, as aforesaid were followed up by companypleted assessment proceedings in respect of the said respective years and also certificate proceedings under section 46 2 of the Act.
Though separately filed, the petitioner in each of them is the same individual, Nandram Agarwalla, who is the sole proprietor of a business which he carries on under the name and style of Sriram Jhabarmull.
The petitioner in Petition No.
Before 28th September, 1954, they were being assessed by the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Patna.
These cases were companytinued by the latter officer and numberices under section 34 of the Act were also issued by him against them for the assessment years 1947 1948 to 1951 52.
The principal place of business is at Kalimpong, in the district of Darjeeling, though there is also a branch at Calcutta.
2 to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle VI, Delhi, and on 12th July, 1955, it similarly transferred the cases of petitioner No.
112 of 1956 is S. Ram Singh, son of S. Narain Singh.
On March 15, 1946, the cases of the petitioner were transferred from the Income tax Officer, Jalpaiguri, Darjeeling, to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle I, Calcutta, and a companyple of months thereafter they were again transferred to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle IV, Calcutta.
It is a business inter alia of import and export of piece goods, as companymission agents, and dealers in raw wool and other materials.
No objection was taken by the petitioner to this order of transfer until after the assessment order was passed against him, but he also challenged the validity of the said order of transfer and the proceedings entertained by the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Amritsar, thereafter on the same grounds as the other petitioners.
On 28th September, 1954, the Central Board of Revenue made an order transferring their cases to the Income tax Officer, Central Circle XI, Calcutta.
Each one of them filed a separate petition challenging the said orders of transfer by the Commissioner of Income tax and the proceedings entertained by the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Amritsar, against them on the score of the unconstitutionality of section 5 7A of the Act.
The said officer companytinued the said case and reopened the assessment for the years 1944 45 to 1950 51 and companypleted the assessment for the assessment years 1947 48, 1950 51 and 1951 52.
85 of 1956 was filed by Messrs. Bhagwan Das sud Sons, merchants, Hoshiarpur, but on that date their case was transferred under section 5 7A of the Act by the Commissioner of Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Ambala.
