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

1951 Supreme(Bom) 123

M.C.CHAGLA, S.R.TANDOLKAR
K. K. Porbunderwalla – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City – Respondent


Judgment

Chagla, C.J.

1. This is a reference which raises a very short but important question as to the competency of an appeal to the Tribunal. Assessment orders were passed by the Income-tax Officer on the May 29, 1948, with regard to the assessments for the years 1945-46, 1946-47 and 1947-48 and an appeal was preferred against these orders to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on February 26, 1949. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed the appeal as being out of time. The contention of the assessee was that this appeal as being out of time, the contention of the assessee was that this appeal as being out of time. The contention of the assessee was that this appeal was in time because as required by law service of the notice of demand in respect of the assessment was not served upon him until January 29, 1949, and he having filed the appeal within thirty days of that service, viz., on February 29, 1949, the appeal was in time. The contention was not accepted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who held that the service of the notice of demand was validly made upon a representative of the assessee and therefore the appeal was barred by limitation. From this decision o










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