A.N.GROVER, J.C.SHAH, V.RAMASWAMI
Income Tax Officer, District II (ii) Kanpur – Appellant
Versus
Mani Ram – Respondent
Judgment
RAMASWAMI, J.:- In these appeals which have been heard together a common question of law arises for determination, that is, whether the expression "any person who has not hitherto been assessed" in Section 18A (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the Act) after the Income Tax Amendment Act (Act 67 of 1949) should be interpreted so as to include a person who has only been provisionally assessed under Section 23B of that Act.
2. The respondents in these appeals are four persons - Mani Ram, Jagmohan, Kishandas, Bhagirathmal - partners of Shri Kishan Das, Dhankutti, Kanpur. They were members of a joint Hindu family carrying on business until they became divided in the middle of assessment year 1953-54. Thereafter they were carrying on the business in partnership. For the year 1953-54, the firm submitted a return showing loss. But in the next succeeding year 1954-55 it disclosed a profit and submitted a return. All the four partners filed returns individually on 27-9-1954 and they were provisionally assessed on their returns on 14-10-1954. But the regular assessment was made for this year only on 27-2-1958. The firm continued to make profits in the subsequent years
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.