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

1986 Supreme(Cal) 177

DIPAK KUMAR SEN, A.K.SENGUPTA
M. B. MERCANTILE CO – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PRONOB PAL

AJIT KUMAR SENGUPTA, J.

( 1 ) IN this reference under Section 256 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1962-63, an interesting question of law arises as to whether the Income-tax Officer, not having completed the assessment within the normal period of limitation of four years prescribed by the Act can, by applying the provisions of Section 271 (1) (c), assume jurisdiction to make an assessment under Section 143 (3) of the Act.

( 2 ) A statement of case was filed by the Tribunal referring the following questions of law for determination by this court:" (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the provisions of Section 271 (1) (c) were attracted and as such justified in applying the provisions of Section 153 (1) (b) of the Income-tax , Act, 1961, and in holding that the assessment was not time-barred ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and particularly in view of the fact that the assessee made a disclosure under Section 271 (4a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, disclosing a sum of Rs. 1,14,092 being the peak credit for the relevant assessment year long before the assessm
































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