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

1978 Supreme(Cal) 537

S.C.DEB, SUDHINDRA MOHAN GUHA
V. R. SONTI – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AJIT SEN GUPTA, N.K.PODDAR, R.N.Saha

DEB, J.

( 1 ) THE following question is involved in this reference under Section 256 (1) of the I. T. Act, 1961:" Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that there was no mistake apparent from the record in its' order dated 25th August, 1973, which could be rectified under Section 254 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?"

( 2 ) THE statement of the case relates to the assessment year 1965-66. The assessee is an individual. He was the owner of a business and sold it to a company in the relevant previous year. He also sold the goodwill of the said business to that company for Rs. 60,000. The ITO brought Rs. 60,000 to tax under the head "capital gains".

( 3 ) THE appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed by both the appellate authorities. The assessee then made an application before the Tribunal under Section 254 (2) of the I. T. Act, 1961, without asking for setting aside of the appellate order of the Tribunal.

( 4 ) IT may be now noted here that two grounds were taken before the Tribunal in that application but only one ground has been argued before us which was argued before the Tribunal on behalf of the assessee.













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