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

1989 Supreme(Cal) 248

PADMA KHASTGIR, MAHITOSH MAJUMDAR
INCOME-TAX OFFICER – Appellant
Versus
JAMES JOSEPH Ogorman – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.PAL, MANISHA SEAL, PRANAB PAL, RAM CHANDRA PRASAD

PADMA KHASTGIR, J.

( 1 ) BEING aggrieved by issuance of a notice under Section 133 (6) of the Income tax Act, 1961, and a notice under Section 131 of the Income-lax Act, a writ petition was tiled before this court. By a judgment and order dated August 19, 1980, Mr. Justice Samarendra Chandra Deb, as his Lordship then was, was pleased to quash and set aside the notice under Section 131 issued by the Income-tax Officer and made the rule absolute, Therefrom the present appeal has been preferred by the Income-tax Officer, 'h' Ward, Companies, District IV, Calcutta. The only point which calls for determination in this appeal is whether the Income-tax Officer was justified in issuing a notice under Section 131 of the Income-tax Act. So far as the notice under Section 133 (6) of the said Act is concerned inasmuch as the said notice was addressed to the Grindlays Bank Ltd. 's principal officer in a separate proceeding the bank challenged the said notice. The rule in the said writ proceeding was made absolute in favour of the bank. No appeal had been preferred therefrom by the Income-tax Department. Under the circumstances, the learned trial court was only concerned with the notice that wa

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