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

1978 Supreme(Cal) 335

DIPAK KUMAR SEN, C.K.BANERJEE
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
B. R. VASA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AJIT SEN GUPTA, B.L.PAL, SANJOY BHATTACHARYA

SEN, J.

( 1 ) THE facts found and/or admitted in these proceedings, inter alia, are as follows : b. R. Vasa, the assessee, had been assessed to income-tax in the assessment year 1947-48, the relevant previous year being the one ended on the 31st March, 1947. Subsequently, on the 29th February, 1964, it was found that in the said year the assessee had made deposits totalling Rs. 56,996 in an account with the United Bank of India at Bombay which had not been disclosed by the assessee in his return. With the approval of the CBDT, on the 29th March, 1964, a notice under Section 147 of the I. T. Act, 1961, was issued and served on the assessee. Explanations given by the assessee in reassessment proceedings were rejected and the said deposits were added to his total income and brought to tax.

( 2 ) BEING aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the AAC, who confirmed the reassessment. The assessee preferred a further appeal to the Tribunal. It was contended before the Tribunal for the first time that the reassessment proceedings under Section 34 of the Indian I. T. Act, 1922, had become time-barred on the 31st March, 1962, in the instant case and could not have been validly i



















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