| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1975 SLG 543 1975 SLD 543 (1975) 98 ITR 335 |
Allahabad High Court
INCOME-TAX REFERENCE No. 374 OF 1971 SEPTEMBER 21, 1973
SATISH CHANDRA AND A. BANERJEE, JJ.
Deokinandan for the Applicant.
INCOME-TAX REFERENCE No. 374 OF 1971 SEPTEMBER 21, 1973
SATISH CHANDRA AND A. BANERJEE, JJ.
Deokinandan for the Applicant.
Commissioner of IncomE tax
v.
Neeka Lal Jai Narain
Law:
Section:
Section 13(1) of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940 - Hindu Undivided Family - Excess profits tax - Whether excess profits tax could not be imposed on Hindu Undivided Family which had disrupted after issue of notice but before assessment order had been passed - Held, yes FACTS A notice under section 13(1) of the Act, was served on the assessee on 8-6-1942. The karta of the HUF, filed a return on 27-10-1942. A regular assessment was made on 9-9-1947. It was, however, set aside on appeal and the matter was remanded. After remand, a fresh assessment was made which again was set aside in appeal, on the ground that the HUF which was the assessee, had disrupted on 6-9-1943, prior to the passing of the assessment order and since the assessable entity was not in existence on the date of passing of the assessment order the same was invalid. This view was affirmed by the Tribunal on further appeal. The Tribunal relying upon the decision in CIT v. Neekelal Jainarain [1966] 61 ITR 704 (All.), held that the Excess Profits Tax Act contains no provision for the imposition of excess profits tax in regard to a HUF which had disrupted after the issue of notice but before the assessment order had been passed. HELD In view of decision of the Supreme Court in ITO v. Ram Prasad [1972] 86 ITR 145 (SC) wherein the Supreme Court approved the decision in Neekelal Jainarain's case (supra), it was to be held that the order passed by the Tribunal was correct and it was to be affirmed. Note: The case was decided in favour of the assessee. CASES REFERRED TO ITO v. Neekelal Jainarain [1966] 61 ITR 704 (All.) and ITO v. Ram Prasad [1972] 86 ITR 145 (SC). JUDGMENT Satish Chandra, J.-The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the excess profits tax assessment on the Hindu undivided family for the corresponding chargeable period ending October 22, 1941, was rightly cancelled ?" The chargeable accounting period is from October 25, 1940, to October 22, 1941. A notice under section 13(1) of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, was…
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