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

1987 Supreme(AP) 475

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, Y.V.ANJANEYULU
Warner Hindustan Limited – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent


JEEVAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) EIGHT questions have been referred under section 256 (1) of the Income-tax, 1961, four at the instance of the assessee and four at the instance of the Department. Out of the eight questions, five questions are concluded one way or the other by the decisions of this court or the retrospective amendment of the law, as the case may be. With a view to clear the ground, we shall first refer to these questions and also point out in what manner thy are concluded. The first question is :"whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the words regular assessment occurring in section 214 refer only to the original assessment or the first assessment made by the Income-tax Officer and not to any order which may be passed pursuant to an appellate order ?"this question was referred at the instance of the assessee. But it is concluded against the assessee by the decision of this court in Nizams Religious Endowment Trust v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 239. Following the said decision, the said question is answered in the affirmative, i. e. , against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

( 2 ) THE second question, also referred at the instance of the assessee, is :"whether surta












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