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

1969 Supreme(Cal) 163

D.BASU, AJAY KUMAR BASU
ECONOMIC INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD. – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, W. B. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.L.PAL, S.BHATTACHARYYA, S.C.BOSE, Sunil Mukherjee

D. BASU, J.

( 1 ) THE question involved in this appeal is a short one of law on which much fight is not available from reported decisions. The Meghlibundh Tea Company was liable for income-tax for a certain period. It first sold its tea garden assets to a third party and thereafter on 23-9-47, it changed its name to the Economic Investment Corporation Limited under Section 11 (5) of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Though the Economic Investment Corporation, that is to say, the appellant before us, duly intimated the Income-tax Officer of the aforesaid change in the name of the company, the Income-tax Officer (Respondent No. 3) made his assessment for the relevant period (1946-47) on the Meghlibundh Tea Company. Thereafter a Certificate proceeding under the Public Demands Recovery Act was started on the allegation that a sum of Rs. 25,000 and odd was due on account of Income-tax from the Meghlibundh Tea Company. At a later stage or the Certificate Proceedings, the Income-tax Officer requested the Certificate Officer that the name of the Economic Investment Corporation be substituted in place of the Meghlibundh Tea Company, Notice having been served under Section 7 of the Public Dem







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