The procedure thus prescribed in this matter by the impugned Act is substantially prejudicial to the assessee than the procedure prescribed under the Indian Income-tax Act. ” There is a proviso to sub-section (4) which says that for the purpose of enabling the person whose case or points in whose case is or are being investigated to rebut any evidence brought on the record against him, he shall, on application made in this behalf and on payment of such fees as may be prescribed by rules, be furnished with certified copies of documents, statements, papers and materials brought on the record by the Commission.
(a) Certain congenital abnormalities which are latent and only discoverable on full investigations e. In other words, the assessee would have a right to inspect the record and all relevant documents before he is called upon to lead evidence in rebuttal. We thus proceed to first examine the question as to whether there is breach of provisions of Section 42(1) and Section 42(2). Under the provisions of section 37 of the Indian Income-tax Act the proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have -to be observed before the result is arrived at.
The assessee is not even entitled to see his own books which are in the possession of the Commission and take copies of those entries which are favourable to him and which would completely demolish the case made against the assessee by the Commission. He is not even entitled to see all the books of account which may have been impounded under the Act and taken possession of by the Commission. P-21 and the information sent to Circle Officer, Nohar by Exh.
Therefore, it was erroneous to hold that the suit was barred by the law of limitation. The first part is that there is difference between the secret information recorded in Exh. It may well happen that there are entries in those books which contain the rebuttal evidence, but the assessee is not entitled to have their copies. Chatterjee appearing in support of the appeal has reiterated all the three points which were urged on behalf of his clients in the Courts below 3 have now come up to this Court and Mr.
Again, so far as the procedure for reference under subsection (4) of section, 5 is concerned, it is also to a certain extent prejudicial to the assessee. In this case, it is an admitted position that the sale took place on 28- 3-1984 and 14-3-1985. He is entitled only to get copies of that portion of the materials which is brought on the record and which is going to be used against him and it is clear that portions of the material which are in his favour and which have not been brought on the record may not be available to him at all.
The High Court has come to the conclusion that there is breach of mandatory provisions of Section 42(1) and Section 42(2) and further Section 43 which was relied by the Special Judge for holding that there was no necessity to comply Section 42 is not applicable. This right has not been taken away by any express provisions of the Income-tax Act but the impugned Act contains a mandate in sub-section (4) of section 7 to the effect that “no person shall ‘be entitled to inspect, call for, or obtain copies of, any documents, statement or papers or materials furnished to, obtained by or produced before the Advocates Chandigarh Commission or any authorized official in.
It was not disputed by the learned Solicitor-General that the procedure prescribed by the impugned Act in sections 6 and 7 was more drastic than the procedure prescribed in sections 37 and 38 of the Indian Income-tax Act. 294, 297, (3)  USSC 84; (1873) 83 U. The suit having been filed on 15-9-1985 was well within limitation. nThe heirs of defendant No. When an assessment on escaped or evaded income is made under the provisions of section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, all the provisions for arriving *at the assessment provided under section 23(3) come into operation and the assessment has to be made on all relevant materials and on evidence and the assessee Lawyer in Chandigarh ordinarily has Chandigarh Advocate the fullest right to inspect the record and all documents and materials that are to be used against him.
any proceedings under this 465 Act. The breach of Section 42 has been found in two parts. It is only after this date that the question of right to sue on the indemnity (contained in Clause 7) arose. Congenital Defect of Spine, Spina bifida, Sacralisation, (b) Certain familial and hereditary diseases e. It is useful to refer to the findings of the High Court in the above context, which is quoted below: It is not a gift or gratuity, but a sum paid for services, or upon a consideration in addition to or in excess of that Advocates Chandigarh which would ordinarily be given”, (1) (1923) 39 T.
This little, mercy shown to the person whose case is being investigated by the Commission is no substitute for the fullestright of inspection which under ordinary law and the Code of Civil Procedure and in a judicial proceeding a person would have in order to meet the case made against him.