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

1993 Supreme(SC) 814

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, S.P.BHARUCHA
Commissioner Of Income Tax(Additional) , Lucknow – Appellant
Versus
Jeevan Lal Sah – Respondent


(1) THESE appeals are preferred by the Revenue against the judgment of the Allahabad High court answering the question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. These appeals are preferred on a certificate granted by the High court and the only question in respect of which the certificate is granted is:

"WHETHER on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that no penalty could be imposed with reference to the cash deposits on the principle of Anwar Ali case even after the amendment of Section 271 in 1964."

(2) THE assessment years concerned herein are 1962-63, 1963-64, 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1967-68. The assessee is an individual running a tea-stall in Nainital. The returns filed by him were not accepted and assessment completed on best judgment. Subsequently, certain information came in possession of the Department which indicated concealment of income in respect of those years. A 1 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. Anwar Ali, 1970 2 SCC 185 : 76 ITR 696 notice under Section 148 was issued to the assessee in response to which he filed revised returns. In the revised returns, he disclosed the interest received by him on certai




















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