Case Details

Citation(s)
1999 SLG 276 1999 SLD 276 1999 PTD 2006 (1997) 226 ITR 742
Gujarat High Court
Civil Revision Application No.296 of 1994, decision dated: 23rd February, 1994
J. M. PANCHAL, J
Nanavati for Petitioner

JAYANTKUMAR MOTICHAND DOSHI

VS

UNION OF INDIA and others

Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 5.293

Income-tax---Civil Court---Jurisdiction---Bar of suits---Scope of S.293---Order of assessment including amount as income from undisclosed sources---Order passed after giving assessee opportunity to be heard---Appeal filed from order---Suit against order was not maintainable---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, 5.293---Indian Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.9. Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, provides, that the Courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. The mandate contained in section 293 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is very clear, unambiguous and absolute. A suit cannot be brought in any Civil Court to set aside any proceeding taken or order made under the Income-tax Act. The Income Tax Act, 1961, is a complete code in itself dealing with assessment of income of an assessee. The manner in which and the authorities before which an order of assessment can be challenged is also elaborately provided therein. State of Gujarat v. Mangal Traders (1987) 1 GLR 514 and AIR 1987 Guj. 234 fol. Held accordingly, dismissing the revision petition, on the facts, that the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Investigation) had recorded statements of three persons under section 131 of the Act. The petitioner was given opportunity to cross-examine the persons whose statements were recorded. That opportunity was availed of by the petitioner. After considering relevant facts and circumstances, additions of Rs.7,35,000 and Rs.63,000 to the total income of the petitioner on account of income from undisclosed sources were ordered by the Assistant Commissioner of Income¬tax (Investigation). Relevant and cogent reasons had been given by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Investigation) before reaching the conclusion in question. It could not be said that the assessment order was, in any manner, violative of the principles of natural justice or that the same was bad on the ground that no reasons had been assigned for reaching the conclusion in question. No material worth the name was produced on the record of the case to indicate that the order of assessment was passed…
🔒
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