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

1951 Supreme(Cal) 26

HARRIES, BANERJEE
JAGADISH PROSAD PANNALAL – Appellant
Versus
MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE – Respondent


BANERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference under Section 21 (1), Bengal Finance (Sales Tax.) Act, 1941. The section is analogous to Section 66, Income tax Act. The question formulated for our opinion is in these words. "whether on the facts of the case the respective assessments by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes so far as the same has not been modified in appeal and by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in appeal after allowing the deduction have been made to the best of their respective judgments ?"

( 2 ) THE applicants before us are registered dealers and are required to file returns quarterly. A registered dealer has to file a return under Section 10 of the Act. The applicants maintain their accounts according to the Marwari Dewali year. They did not file their returns for the two quarters ended Kartic Badi, 15, 2002 (corresponding with the period 13-4-1945 to 4-11-1945 ). The assessing authority, namely, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Calcutta, (Central), issued a notice on 20-2-1946, directing the applicants to attend in person or by an agent at the office of the Commercial Tax Officer and there to produce, or cause there to be produced, at the













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