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

1992 Supreme(Cal) 379

A.K.SENGUPTA, SHYAMAL KUMAR SEN
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
ANAND AND CO. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K.Bagchi, Debi Pal

AJIT K. SENGUPTA, J.

( 1 ) IN this reference under Section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred for our opinion the following question of law relating to the assessment year 1979-80 :"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right to give a finding on the validity and the authenticity of the signature of an Issuing Officer under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in M. A. No. 51/ (Cal) of 1989 and in I. T. A. No. 1912/ (Cal) of 1985 for the assessment year 1979-80 or whether there is sufficient material on record to come to the conclusion that the purported signature on the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, bears the signature of the Issuing Officer ?"

( 2 ) SHORTLY stated, the facts relating to the question are that, pursuant to a notice issued under Section 148 of the Act read with Section 147 (b), a reassessment was completed under Section 143 (3 ). In the first appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the initiation of the proceedings under Section 147 (b) was unauthorised as it resulted from a change of opinion by the successor-Assess



















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