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

1951 Supreme(Bom) 125

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. Assesment orders were passed by the Income tax Officer on 29.5.1948, 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 26-2--1949. The appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed the 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 29-1-1949, and he having filed the appeal within 30 days of that service, viz., on 27-2-1949, the appeal was in time. This 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 of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner an appeal was preferred to the Tribunal, but the Tribunal held that the appeal was in competent.

[2] Now, in order to decide the question












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