Case Details

Citation(s)
1971 SLG 529 1971 SLD 529 (1971) 81 ITR 552
Calcutta High Court
MATTER No. 101 OF 1965, DECEMBER 1, 1969
T.K. BASU, J
S.K. Banerjee for the Petitioner. Dipankar Gupta for the
Respondent

Smt. Santosh Debi Baid

v.

Income Tax Officer

Law:

Section:

Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for - Assessment years 1956-57 to 1960-61 - Pursuant to cancellation by Commissioner of assessment orders under section 33B of 1922 Act for assessment years in question, ITO issued notices of reassessment under section 148 - Whether since sole ground on which proceedings were sought to be reopened against assessee was that original assessments had been cancelled under section 33-B of 1922 Act, and there was no indication of any omission or failure on assessee's part to disclose fully or truly any material facts necessary for assessment in course of original returns filed in original proceedings, it could be concluded that conditions precedent for assumption of jurisdiction were not fulfilled and, consequently, ITO had no jurisdiction to issue impugned notices under section 148 - Held, yes FACTS For the assessment years 1956-57 to 1960-61, the assessee, having voluntarily submitted her returns along with relevant accounts and materials, the ITO completed her assessment. Commissioner, however, acting under section 33-B of 1922 Act cancelled the assessments, with the direction that fresh assessments be made by the ITO having proper jurisdiction over the case. The ITO thereupon issued notices under section 148 of 1961 Act on the assessee, proposing to reopen the assessments. On writ: HELD The sole ground on which the proceedings were sought to be reopened against the assessee under section 148 of the Act, 1961 was that the original assessment had been cancelled by the CIT under section 33B of the 1922 Act. There was no indication of any omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully or truly any material necessary for her assessment in the course of the original assessment proceedings. The original returns were filed by the assessee in the original proceedings on the basis that the ITO had jurisdiction over her case. Therefore, it could not be said that there was no filing of the return in the instant case or that the returns filed were a nullity. At the highest it was an irregularity which, on the facts…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492