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

1953 Supreme(All) 10

MALIK, V. BHARGAVA
Deo Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Commr. of Income-tax, U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Brijlal Gupta, for Assessee; S.C. Dass, for Defendant.

Judgement

MALIK, CJ.:- Mr. Das on behalf of the opposite party has raised a preliminary objection and has pointed out that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer was under S.18-A (6), Income-tax Act. The assessee having paid in advance less than eighty per cent, of the tax determined on the basis of the regular assessment he was made liable to pay simple interest at the rate of six per cent. per annum. Learned counsel has drawn our attention to the provisions of S.30 (1), Income-tax Act and has pointed out that the order under S.18-A (6) was not appealable. An appeal was, however, filed by the assessee before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but no objection was raised to the maintainability of the appeal and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed the appeal on the merits. Then there was a further appeal filed under S.33 (1) before the Appellate Tribunal which also dismissed the appeal on the merits. Learned counsel has pointed out that the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal being completely without jurisdiction, the order of the Appellate Tribunal cannot be deemed to be an order under S.33. In case the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or


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