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

1952 Supreme(Cal) 93

CHAKRABARTI, BACHAWAT
GOUR MOHAN MULLICK – Appellant
Versus
COMMR OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASOKE CHANDRA SEN, P.C.RAY

CHAKRAVARTTI, J.

( 1 ) THE question raised by this reference has often arisen under the Income-tax Act and has been answered by different High Courts, other than this Court, in different ways. So far as this Court is concerned, it does not appear that the question came up on any previous occasion, either under the Income-tax Act or under the Bengal Agricultural Income-tax Act under which it has now arisen.

( 2 ) THE present reference is by the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and arises out of the following simple facts. In respect of his agricultural income for the accounting year, 1943-44, an assessment order was made on the assessee, Gour Mohan Mullick, on 5-1-1949. The notice of demand was received by him on the 1st of February next, but he did not prefer an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner till 30-5-1949. Since under Section 34 (2) the period of limitation for riling an appeal is 'ordinarily' thirty days from the receipt of the notice of demand, the Assistant Commissioner issued a notice to the assessee to show cause why the petition of appeal should not be rejected as time-barred. Cause was shown but as the Assistant Commissioner did not consider it satisfacto







































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