RAM DATTA SITA RAM OF BASTI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the Commissioner of Income tax under Section 66(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act in pursuance of the order of this Court, dated December 2, 1943. The question referred for decision by this Court are as follows :-

(2.) IT should be noted that the assessment for both the years 1937-38 and 1938-39 were made under Section 23(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act by reason of non-compliance on the part of the assessee with notices under Section 22(4). Thereupon the assessee made applications under Section 27 of the Indian Income-tax Act for cancellation of the assessment, but without sucess. The appeals from the orders passed on applications under Section 27 were also dismissed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who affirmed the conclusion reached by the Income-tax Officer that the assessee deliberately withheld the accounts which must have been maintained by him in respect of the moneys drawn from and returned to his private chest. Against the orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee filed revision petitions under Section 33 of the Income-tax Act before the Commissioner in respect of the assessments for both the years mentioned above and by these revision petitions, the assessee challenged the correctness of the assessments as well as of the appellate orders whereby the orders passed by the Income-tax Officer under Section 27 were confirmed. The Commissioner examined the records and dismissed the revision petitions without giving an opportunity to the assessee to be heard in support of them as according to the Commissioner, the points in issue were quite clear from the records. Dissatisfied with the order passed by the Commissioner the assessee filed an application before him under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act requesting him to refer to the High Court certain questions mentioned in the application. This application was rejected by the Commissioner upon the ground that by the order made by him under Section 33, the assesseements were not enhanced and the said orders were not otherwise prejudicial to the assessee within the meaning of Section 66(2). Thereupon the assessee made an application before this Court under Section 66 (3) of the Indian Income-tax Act and this Court was of the opinion that certain questions of law arose out of the order made by the Commissioner under Section 33 and directed the Commissioner to state the case. Hence this reference.

(3.) THE proviso to this section means that the Commissioner shall not put the assessee in a worse position than he alsready is without giving him an opportunity of being heard.