N. Rajagopala Sastri and D. Gupta, for respondents Nos.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, R. S. Pathak, S. N. Andley, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, for the petitioner.
85 of 1959.
1 and 2.
April 14.
The respondents are the Commissioner of Income tax, Lucknow, the Income tax Officer, Lucknow, and the Collectors of three districts in Uttar Pradesh, namely, Dehra Dun, kanpur and Lucknow, being officers under whose orders certain properties of the petitioner and his family have been attached in pursuance of a numberice of demand issued under s. 29 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, in circumstances which we shall presently state.
Then, an Autho rised Official appointed by the Commission companymenced an investigation into the cases in February, 1949, and in due companyrse submitted a report to the Commission.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
In 1948 the Central Government referred a number of cases in which the petitioner was companycerned to the Income tax Investigation Commission set up under the relevant provisions of the Taxation on Income Investigation Commission Act, 1947 Act XXX of 1947 , hereinafter referred to as the Act.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. DAS,J. One Ranjit Singh is the petitioner before us.
The facts are shortly these.
Writ Petition under Art.
relating thereto.
32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
The petitioner companyplied with the numberice.
On May 30, 1948, the Secretary of the Commission issued a numberice to the petitioner to furnish a list of businesses or companycerns in which the petitioner was interested and to produce the account books, registers etc.
