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

1954 Supreme(Bom) 41

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


JUDGMENT - Chagla, C.J.

1. The answer which we have to give to the questions submitted to us on this reference is both simple and obvious. A public notice was issued Under Section 22(1) and the period fixed under that section was 65 days. The notice was issued in respect of the assessment year 1945-46 and that was on 1-5-1945. The assesses made a return on 5-1-1950, and in the return he showed his assessable income as Rs. 1,935. He added a foot-note to his return to the following effect: "My wife has sold her old ornaments and deposited the sum of Rs. 59,026 in the firm of Assar Syndicate in which I am a partner." On 27-2-1950, the Income-tax Officer issued a notice upon the assessee Under Section 34 and he made an assessment order on 26-2-1951, holding that the sum of Rs. 59,026 constituted the income of the assessee and assessing him to tax on that income. Now, it is this assessment order that was challenged before the Tribunal by the assessee and the Tribunal upheld that order.

2. Now, the order is challenged, firstly, on the ground that the proceedings which were initiated under Section 34 were not valid proceedings, and inasmuch as the proceedings were not valid, the order was




















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