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

1956 Supreme(Cal) 7

CHAKRABARTI, SARMA SARKAR
R. K. DAS AND CO. – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.L.PAL, E.R.Meyer, K.P.SINHA, S.K.BANERJEE

CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J.

( 1 ) THE assessee at whose instance this Reference under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act has been made is a firm. In maintaining its accounts, it observes the calendar year. Admittedly during the year 1945, the assessee earned a taxable income, but it did not file any return in response to the general notice issued under Section 22 (1) of the Act, nor did the Income-tax Officer issue any notice to the assessee under Section 22 (2 ). By the time he discovered the omission, the assessment year which was the year 1946-47 had already expired. At that stage, therefore, he could issue a notice only under Section 34 of the Act and he did so on 23-8-1948. As Section 34 stood at that time no sanction of the Commissioner for the issue of a notice under the section was required and consequently none was obtained.

( 2 ) IT appears that the assessee did not file a return in compliance with the notice. Instead a partner appeared before the Income-tax Officer on 8-11-1948, and asked for time till the end of January. 1949, on the ground that the books of the business for the relevant year had not yet been closed. The Income-tax Officer was not prepared to allow the time

















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