| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1972 SLG 416 1972 SLD 416 (1972) 83 ITR 339 |
Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL NOS 1306 & 1307 OF 1967 SEPTEMBER 24, 1971
C.A. VAIDIALINGAM AND P., JAGANMOHAN REDDY, JJ.
B. Sen, Senior R.N. Sachthey for the Appellant.
CIVIL APPEAL NOS 1306 & 1307 OF 1967 SEPTEMBER 24, 1971
C.A. VAIDIALINGAM AND P., JAGANMOHAN REDDY, JJ.
B. Sen, Senior R.N. Sachthey for the Appellant.
Commissioner of IncomE tax
v.
C. M. Jaffar Khan
Law:
Section:
Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Corresponding to section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) read with paragraph 5 of part B States (Taxation concessions) order 1950 - Income escaping assessment - General - Assessment year 1950-51 - Assessments of both partnership firm in which assessee was a partner, and assessee as individual were completed under Mysore Income-tax Act, 1923 in respect of their respective incomes - While firm paid assessed tax, assessee got a refund under Mysore Act - Later ITO issued notice for reopening of assessment under section 34 of 1922 Act - Whether refund order given by ITO on return filed by assessee was an assessment within meaning of paragraph 5 of Order - Held, yes - Whether assessment having been made under Mysore Act in respect of income of year ending 30-6-1949 it fell within provision of paragraph 5(1) of Order which makes Act of 1922 inapplicable to such assessments - Held, yes - Whether any omission to give information or failure to file a return or failure to disclose truly and fully all material facts which are a condition of reopening of assessments under section 34 of 1922 Act do not appertain to ITO under 1922 Act but to ITO under Mysore Act, and therefore, section 34 of 1922 Act had no application - Held, yes FACTS A registered firm of partnership of which the assessee was a partner, filed a return in respect of its income for the period ending 30-6-1949, under the Mysore Act and an assessment was made thereon which was duly paid. The assessee also filed his return in respect of his individual income including his share of income from the partnership firm for the accounting year ending 30-6-1949, under the Mysore Income-tax Act, 1923. The ITO passed an order directing refund due to the difference in the rate of tax applicable to him and the maximum rate. Subsequently, the ITO issued notice to him under section 34 of the 1922 Act on the ground that assessee's income had escaped assessment. The assessee objected to the reopening of the assessment on the ground that he had already been assessed under the Mysore Act; that a refund of tax had been given to him after making assessment under that Act; and that…
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