The appellant thereafter moved the Allahabad High Court for the grant of a writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from proceeding with the recovery of income tax from the appellant.
64,622.
194 of 1959, The appellant alleged that he was a partner of a firm named Regal Dehydrating Company, Meerut, in which he held 12/53 share.
It was stated that on January 15, 1945, the appellant sold away his share in the partnership to one Ram Chander, son of Nathmal Das, The partnership firm was assessed to income tax for the assessment year 1945 46, by the Income tax Officer, C Ward, Meerut, by the assessment order dated December 9, 1952, on a total income of Rs.
The appellant took the matter in appeal under the Letters Patent but the appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench on April 28, 1964.
It was stated in the companynter affidavit of the respondents that the return of income filed on behalf of the firm showed the appellant to be a partner at the relevant time and there was numberillegality in the order of assessment or in the recovery proceedings taken against the appellant.
It appears that the Income tax Officer forwarded a certificate to the Collector under Section 46 2 of the Act for recovery of the tax due and the case of the appellant is that he learnt of the proceedings for the first time in the third week of September, 1958, when the Naib Tehsildar Collection , Nagina, asked him to deposit the amount of income tax.
627 of 1961 by which the Division Bench dismissed the appellants appeal and companyfirmed the order of the single judge dismissing the appellants writ petition No.
The case of the appellant was that he had ceased to be a partner at the time of the assessment and was number liable to pay the income tax assessed upon the partnership firm.
Ramaswami, J. This appeal is brought by certificate from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, dated April 28, 1964, in Special Appeal No.
