Case Details

Citation(s)
1959 SLG 305 1959 SLD 305 (1959) 37 ITR 484

WRIT PETITION No. 1087 OF 1957, JULY 7, 1959
MOHAMMAD AHMED ANSARI, J.
G. Venkatrama Sastri for the Petitioner. C. Kondaiah for the
Respondent

Malladi Sitarama Sastri

v.

Income Tax Officer

Law:

Section:

Section 220 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Corresponding to section 45 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) - Collection and recovery of tax - When tax payable and when assessee deemed in default - Assessment year 1946-47 - Whether time assessee has had to make payment of tax may furnish a reason for denying him further stay under section 45 of 1922 Act - Held, yes - Whether partial or total incorrectness of grounds on which a discretionary statutory power is not exercised would not serve as a basis for issuing mandamus, for that would come to reviewing grounds and would amount to exercise of appellate or revisory jurisdiction over authority - Held, yes FACTS The assessee had applied to the ITO not to treat him as a defaulter, as he had filed an appeal against the main assessment order. The application was made under section 45 of the 1922 Act and the petitioner while seeking the adjournment gave an undertaking not to alienate his properties. In the mean time an application under section 27 of the 1922 Act had also been filed before the ITO. The officer ordered adjournment till the disposal by him of the proceeding under section 27 of the 1922 Act. The proceedings under section 27 of the 1922 Act were concluded against the assessee and the assessee was called upon to pay the tax. Thereupon the assessee having filed the other appeal against the order by the ITO under section 27 of the 1922 Act again requested him not to declare him a defaulter. This was made under section 45 of the 1922 Act. The assessee further informed the ITO that he was ready to offer security for the tax amount. However, the Officer regretted his inability to entertain any request on behalf of the assessee and asked for the payment of the tax. On writ: HELD Partial or total incorrectness of the grounds on which a discretionary statutory power is not exercised, would not serve as a basis for issuing a mandamus; for that would come to reviewing the grounds and would amount to the exercise of the appellate or revisory jurisdiction over the authority. The assessee had had time to make the payment and that might furnish a reason for denying him further stay under section 45 of the 1922 Act. The…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492