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

1981 Supreme(Cal) 194

SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE, SUDHINDRA MOHAN GUHA
CALCUTTA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION LTD. – Appellant
Versus
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.ROY CHOUDHURY, D.PAL, S.SEN

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) IN this reference under Section 256 (1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred to this court:"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax legally invoked the provisions of Section 263 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?"

( 2 ) WHETHER, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the fact that the assessee is a sterling company maintaining accounts in pound sterling, the Tribunal was right in holding that the written down value of the fixed assets should be determined on the basis of the rate of exchange with reference to the date of contract or the date of delivery or the date of payment for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71 ?" 2. This reference arises out of four assessment years, viz. , assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71. In order to appreciate the questions, it would be necessary to refer to certain facts.

( 3 ) THE assessee-company is engaged in the business of supply of electricity. The assessment years concern the previous year ended on 31st March o

























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