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

1956 Supreme(All) 81

MOOTHAM, UPADHYA
SRINIWAS – Appellant
Versus
INCOME-TAX OFFICER a WARD, SITAPUR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.Swarup, R.N.Gulati

MOOTHAM, CJ.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the circumstances in which it has been filed being shortly as follows :

( 2 ) ON 31-3-1955, the respondent, who is the Income-tax Officer, A Ward, Sitapur, issued two notices under Section 34, Income-tax Act, to the petitioners who are five in number. The address of the petitioners was given in each of these notices as being care of Messrs. Pushkar Mal Sagar mal, Nai Bazar, Lakhimpur Kheri, within this State. The notices (which were the same in form) stated that the respondent had reason to believe that the. income of the petitioners assessable to income-tax for the year ending 31-3-1947 had both escaped assessment and had been under-assessed, that he proposed to assess such income and it called upon the petitioners to deliver within the time stated in the notices a return of their total income and total world income assessable to income-tax for the year ending 31-8-1947. These notices, it is to be observed, were issued by the respondent on the last day of the maximum period of eight years within which a notice may be issued under Section 34 of the Act.

( 3 ) ONE of these notices was sent by post and was del




























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