Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Dinesh Chand Jain v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kanpur - WRIT TAX No. 814 of 1999 [2007] RD-AH 3053 (23 February 2007)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 36

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.  814 of 1999

Dinesh Chand Jain vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Kanpur.

Hon'ble R.K.Agrawal, J.

Hon'ble Bharati Sapru, J.

By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner- Dinesh Chand Jain has challenged the notice dated 9th December, 1998 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the Assessment Year 1993-94 and all proceedings taken in pursuance thereof. The main ground of challenge is that the reasons were recorded by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur on 16th October, 1998 whereas the approval/sanction of the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax was obtained on 15th October, 1998. The reasons recorded by the respondents have also been challenged on the ground that there was no relevant material for forming belief that income has escaped assessment to tax.

The original record relating to recording reasons and grant of approval/sanction by the Commissioner of Income Tax was summoned by the Court vide order dated 11th August, 2006. Sri Govind Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has produced the original record, which has been perused by the Court. Sri S.D.Singh learned counsel for the petitioner was permitted to peruse the record. On perusal of the record we find that the Assessing Authority has recorded reasons for reopening the assessment and has sent the same in the prescribed proforma to the Commissioner of Income Tax  on 7th September, 1998 and Commissioner of Income Tax had accorded his approval on 14th September, 1998 which was communicated to the respondent vide letter dated 15th October, 1998. Thereafter the notice has been issued after reproducing reasons recorded earlier in the order sheet. Thus, the submission that the approval/sanction was obtained from the Commissioner of Income Tax even before recording the reasons is not correct. So far as the sufficiency to the material on which the respondent had formed reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment to tax is concerned this Court cannot look into it. The Court can only examine whether there is any material and whether the material is relevant to form the belief of escaped income.  Similar reasons have been upheld by this Court in the case of the petitioner himself in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 583 of 1999 decided on 9th September, 2005 since reported in (2006) 280 ITR 567.

Thus, we do not find any illegality in the proceedings initiated under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Act. The writ petition is, therefore dismissed. Interim order if any, stands vacated.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.