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

1990 Supreme(All) 440

B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. K. MATHUR
SHRIMATI MAJJO – Appellant
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MARKANDE KATJU, VIKRAM GULATI

B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, CJ.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is challenging the validity of a notice issued under Section 281b of the income-tax Act, 1961.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is not a regular assessee. Her land was acquired under a notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act on May 9, 1976. The declaration under Section 6 (1) was published on June 4, 1976, and the award passed on September 5, 1984. The petitioner says that possession of land was taken on March 25, 1980. According to law, it is that date on which the property passes to the Government. The petitioner is, however, not in a position to state when she actually received the compensation. Be that as it may, it appears that she put the compensation received by her in a bank in the form of fixed deposits and in a savings bank account, namely, in the Allahabad Bank, Tejgarhi, Meerut. On December 1, 1988, the bank informed the petitioner that the said F. D. R. and S. B. account has been attached by the assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle II, Meerut, through his letter dated September 28, 1988. The petitioner came to this court by way of a writ petition on January 9, 1989. .

( 3 ) THE contention is that an 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