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

1951 Supreme(Cal) 167

Chakrabarti, Das, Gupta
Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax – Appellant
Versus
Sultan Ali Gharami – Respondent


Judgment

CHAKRAVARTTI, J.

1. THIS is a reference under s. 63(1) of the Bengal Agrl. IT Act and concerns a somewhat tricky point of procedure, arising out of the following facts.

2. ON the 8th Feb., 1945, a general notice under s. 24(1) of the Bengal Agrl. IT Act was published in the press, calling for returns of agricultural income of the "previous year", relative to the asst. yr. 1944-45. The respondent assessee did not file any return in compliance with that notice nor was any individual notice under s. 24(2) served on him at any time during the assessment year. About three years later, on the 16th March, 1948, he received a notice under s. 24(2), requiring him to file a return for the asst. yr. 1944-45. He complied with that notice and on the 15th June, 1948, filed a return in which he showed an income of Rs. 1,242-6-3 for 1350 B. S., which was the "previous" or accounting year in his case. The ITO was not satisfied that the return was correct and so on the 9th July, 1948, he served two further notices on the assessee one under s. 24(4) of the Act requiring him to produce his accounts and another under s. 25(2) requiring him to produce any evidence on which he himself might wish t




















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