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

1963 Supreme(Cal) 124

B.N.BANERJEE
KALAWATI DEBI HARALALKA – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
E.R.Meyer, S.MUKHERJEE, SUBIMAL ROY

( 1 ) SECTION 297 of the Income-tax Act 1961, which repeals the Income-tax Act 1922 with certain savings, poses a problem, which need be worked out in this Rule.

( 2 ) IT is necessary for me, at the outset, to set out the circumstances in which he problem arises in this Rule. The petitioner is an assessee to income-tax. In the month of January, 1961, the petitioner filed returns of her income for the assessment years 1952-53 to 1960-61. The respondent Income-tax Officer found that the principal sources of income of the petitioner comprised of interest on certain investments and profit from speculations in shares and silver as also from other miscellaneous sources. On the above sources of income, the respondent Income-tax Officer assessed the petitioner on income computed at: (a) Rs. 12,150/- for the assessment year 1952-53 (b) Rs. 5,045/- for the assessment year 1953-54 (c) Rs. 6,760/- for the assessment year 1 954-55 (d) Rs. 5,760/- for the assessment year 1955-56 (e) Rs. 5,350/- for the assessment year 1956-57 (f) Rs. 5,460/- for the assessment year 1957-58 (g) Rs. 6,170/- for the assessment year 1958-59 (h) Rs. 6,930/- for the assessment year 959-60 (i) Rs. 7,315/- for the asse





























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