| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1955 SLG 266 1955 SLD 266 (1955) 28 ITR 601 |
Madras High Court
RAJAGOPALAN AND RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
RAJAGOPALAN AND RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Sivagaminatha Moopanar & Sons
v.
Income Tax Officer
Law:
Section:
Section 271(1)(c), read with sections 276C/277, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Corresponding to section 28(1)(c), read with sections 51 and 52, of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) - Penalty - For concealment of income - Assessment years 1944-45 to 1947-48 - Whether expression 'taxes on income' in Entry 54 of Federal list in Schedule VII of Government of India Act, 1935, is of widest import and would include laws in relation to taxation of evaded income and, therefore, section 28 of 1922 Act is within competence of central legislature -Held, yes - Whether quantum of penalty is one for legislature to decide and is wholly irrelevant for determining constitutional validity of penalty provision - Held, yes - Whether if in their nature two remedies provided under section 28 and under sections 51 and 52 of 1922 Act are not mutually exclusive and are concurrent, grant of a concession to assessee in form of a provision in section 28(4) of 1922 Act does not alter situation and make, two provisions mutually exclusive for purpose of attracting vice of unequal protection of laws forbidden by article 14 of Constitution - Held, yes - Whether proceedings for levy of penalty must be initiated by authority when it is in seisin of assessment or other proceedings during course of which it is found that assessee has brought himself within mischief of section 28 of 1922 Act but when once notice has been issued, jurisdiction of that authority to continue proceedings is not dependent upon continuance of other proceedings in course of which penalty proceedings came to be initiated - Held, yes FACTS The assessee-petitioner was a yarn dealer. The ITO holding that the assessee had deliberately furnished false particulars regarding his income made some additions. Assessments for years 1944-45 and 1945-46 were confirmed by the Tribunal while the revision for the assessment years 1946-47 and 1947-48 were dismissed by the Commissioner. Thereafter, ITO initiated proceedings under section 28(1)(c) of 1922 Act. On writ challenging the penalty proceedings the assessee submitted that (1) section 28 of the 1922 Act which enables the ITO and other income-tax authorities to levy a penalty in certain…
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