Special leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties. In this
case, the Commissioners of Income-tax, Delhi-IX and X, had passed orders under
section 132(12) allowing petitions filed by the appellant to release the pay
orders in question to the appellant (subject to bank guarantee in respect of a
small amount with which we are not here concerned). There were two orders to
this effect dated November 27, 1989, and December 15, 1989. Subsequently, one of
the Commissioners "revised" his order dated November 27, 1989, and
dismissed the petition filed by the appellant. This was on March 1, 1990. He did
this in view of an assessment order which had been made subsequently on one S.
K. Aggarwal. It is the validity of this order that is impugned in this appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that,
subsequently, there have been several developments in this case. The assessment
order made in the case of S. K. Aggarwal has been set aside for being redone. We
also find that the High Court, towards the end of its judgment, observed that,
so long as the assessment on S. K. Aggarwal is not set aside, the question of
the amount of Rs. 49.03 lakhs being ordered to be paid to the appellant does not
arise. This is also an aspect which would call for reconsideration of the
position in view of the fact that S. K. Aggarwal's assessment has been set
aside. There are also, according to the appellant, certain other facts which
have to be placed before the Commissioner of Income-tax in connection with the
above matter.
Having regard to all these circumstances, we are of the
opinion that the best course is to set aside the order of the High Court as well
as the orders of the Commissioners of Income-tax dated November 27, 1989,
December 15, 1989 as well as March, 1, 1990. In other words, the petitions filed
before the Commissioners by the appellant, under section 132(11) of the
Income-tax Act would be restored to the file of the Commissioners for being
disposed of afresh in accordance with law.
The Commissioners of Income-tax may now dispose of the
petitions afresh, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant
within a period of four months from today in accordance with law. Till the
disposal of the petitions, the restraint orders passed under section 132(5), and
any action that might have been taken in pursuance thereof will continue to be
in force.
We should not be understood to have expressed any opinion
on the merits of the issue in the case or on the points raised before, or
decided by, the High Court.
The appeal is disposed of as above with no order as to
costs.
