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

1973 Supreme(Kar) 263

K.J.SHETTY
P. BALCHAND – Appellant
Versus
TAX RECOVERY OFFICER – Respondent


Advocates:
K.SRINIVASAN, S.R.RAJASEKHARAMURTHY

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, in which the petitioner challenges the recovery proceedings under the Indian, Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act' ).

( 2 ) THE petitioner was a partner of the firm named 'hindusthan Jewellery mart' upto 13-11-1966. For the assessment year 1967-68 the said firm was assessed to income-tax as an unregistered firm. As per the assessment order dt. 12-2-1968, the firm was liable to pay Rs. 32,840. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the assessment order in appeal before the appellate assistant Commissioner and also on further appeal before the Income-tax appellate Tribunal. After 13-11-1966, the petitioner became a partner of a new firm named hindusthan Drug House.

( 3 ) ON 30-3-1969, the Income-tax Officer (Collection), Circle 1, Bangalore 1, issued a certificate under S. 222 of the Act to the Tax Recovery Officer, bangalore to recover a sum of Rs. 31,919 together with certain interest the certificate showed the ussessee in default as 'hindusthan Jewellery mart'. Pursuant to the said certificate, the Tax Recovery Officer issued a notice of demand for Rs. 35,710 to the Hindusthan Jewellery Mart. The petition











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