SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1068

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, SUHAS C.SEN
Poothundu Plantations Private LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Agricultural Income Tax Officer, Chittoor, Kerala State – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sen, J.-Leave granted.

2. This case arises out of an order of rectification of mistake apparent on the face of record under Section 36 of the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act. The Section, as it stood at the material time, was as under :-

"36. Rectification of mistake: (1) The authority which passed an order on appeal or revision may at any time within three years from the date of such order passed by him on appeal or in revision, and the Agricultural Income Tax Officer may at any time within three years from the date of any assessment or refund order passed by him, of his own motion, rectify any mistake apparent from the record of the appeal, revision, assessment or refund, as the case may be, and shall within the like period rectify any such mistake which has been brought to his notice by an assessee :

3. The short question in this case is whether an Agricultural Income Tax Officer can rectify the order passed by his predecessor in office, on the ground that the assessment order was passed by wrongly construing Section 12 of the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act. Section 12 before its amendment stood as under:-

"12. Carrying forward of loss:- Where any person sustains a lo











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top