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

1980 Supreme(Cal) 115

S.C.DEB, R.N.PYNE
DILIP KUMAR MITRA – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S.Lahiry, AJIT SEN GUPTA, P.K.PAL

S. C. DEB, J.

( 1 ) THE following questions are involved in this reference under Section 256 (2) of the I. T. Act, 1961:"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in ordering the imposition of penalty on the assessee under Section 271 (1) (c) read with Section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the annual income of M/s. Hindusthan Trading Corporation on the return filed by Sm. Bhadra Mitra ?

( 2 ) IF the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the quantum of penalty and dismissing the appeal? "2. The assessee is an individual and the reference relates to the assessment year 1965-66. In the return of income the assessee did not show the income from the business under the name and style of M/s. Hindusthan Trading Corporation and the capital gains from the sale of a land which stood in the name of his wife.

( 3 ) THE ITO included the income of Hindusthan Trading Corporation and also the capital gains in respect of the aforesaid in the assessment. The AAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee who filed a further appeal before










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