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

1973 Supreme(Kar) 164

GOVINDA BHAT, K.J.SHETTY
ALL INDIA SEWING MACHINE CO – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – Respondent


Advocates:
Balakrishna, K.SRINIVASAN, S.R.RAJASEKHARAMURTHY

GOVINDA BHAT, CJ.

( 1 ) THE Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench has stated a case for the opinion of this Court under S. 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter called 'the Act' and referred the following question of law" Whether, on the circumstatices of the case, levy of penalty under section ?71 (1) (a) is valid in law? "with the consent of the learned Counsel for the Assessee and the Department, we recast the question as follows :" Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the the levy of penalty under S. 271 (1) (s) is justified in law? "

( 2 ) THE Assessee is a registered firm and the relevant accounting period was the financial year ended on 31-3-1966. The return of income under S. 139 (2) became due on 7-10-1966. The Assessee did not file its itrc. 21 of 1971. return by the said date nor did it apply for extension of time until 17-12- 1966. The request for extension of time made on 17-12-1966 was not granted by the Income Tax Officer. The return was filed on 22-2-1967 a,nd thereafter the assessment was finalised on 28-2-1967 in the status of the registered firm. The firm's income tax amounted to Rs. 4,565 while the interest under Section









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