Kamalam Rajendran vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 27 April, 1998
But now it has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the said W. P. No. 9339 of 1988 (Kamalam Rajendran v. Inspecting Asst. CIT ), has been allowed by this court on March 24, 1998, and he has also produced a copy of the orders of the said writ petition. In the said order, this court has clearly come to a conclusion that in the instant case, admittedly, the petitioner has fully and truly disclosed all the material facts by producing the vouchers and other contractor's bills, etc., at the appropriate time for assessing the property supported by the valuation certificate under Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, for assessing the same both under the Income-tax Act as well as under the Wealth-tax Act. In the said order, this court has elaborately discussed all the facts and circumstances of this case and also a number of decisions relied on by both the sides. In the said order, my learned brother judge has clearly held that he does not find any justification to hold that the property has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act, enabling" the respondent to issue the impugned notice therein under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act. Further, in the said order, it has been clearly stated by this court that the impugned order therein lacks very much, the jurisdic-tional fact, namely, that the assessing" authority had reason to believe that the property, namely, the building located at RA 1, RA 2, Poonga Street, Thirunagar, Madurai-625 008, has escaped assessment and, therefore, it was ultimately held by this court that the impugned notice therein was without jurisdiction and accordingly the same was quashed and the writ petition was allowed. That writ petition was filed in regard to the notice issued for the year 1983-84 whereas this writ petition is for a similar notice issued for the year 1984-85.