| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLG 750 1980 SLD 750 (1980) 122 ITR 591 |
Allahabad High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 369 OF 1975
SATISH CHANDRA, C.J. AND KAILASH NATH GOEL, J.
Ashok Gupta for the Applicant
IT REFERENCE No. 369 OF 1975
SATISH CHANDRA, C.J. AND KAILASH NATH GOEL, J.
Ashok Gupta for the Applicant
Addl. Commissioner of Income tax
v.
Lalta Pd. Ram Prakash
Law:
Section:
Section 186 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Firm - Position prior to 1-4-1993 - Assessment year 1971-72 - Assessee firm carried on business of money lending as well as conducting teh bazari-contract work - Assessee declared certain Income from money lending business but nil income from teh bazari contract business - On basis of information that assessee had obtained teh-bazari contract in name of close relative, ITO issued a notice under section 142 requiring assessee to produce accounts of that contract business - Assessee however, replied that it had not done any such business - ITO disbelieved statement of assessee and made an ex-parte assessment - He also passed an order under section 186(2) cancelling registration of firm - Tribunal held that cancellation of registration was not justified - On instant reference, it was seen that ex-parte assessment had been maintained upto Tribunal stage with result that ITO's view that assessee's case that it had not taken any interest of teh-bazari was false had also been maintained - Whether, in view of aforesaid, it could be concluded that there was material non-compliance of notice under section 142 on part of assessee as its stand that it had not taken any teh bazari contract was found to be false - Held, yes - Whether, in such circumstances, case of cancellation of registration of assessee -firm under section 186(2) was in fact and in law made out - Held, yes FACTS The assessee firm carried on business of money lending as well as conducting teh-bazari contract work. In its return for the year 1970-71, the assessee declared some income from its money lending business but nil income from the teh-bazari business. The ITO got information that the assessee had taken a teh-bazari contract. The contract was taken in the name of S, who was the real sister's husband of one partner and the son-in-law of the other partner, of the assessee-firm. The ITO issued notice under section. 142 requiring the assessee to produce the accounts of said contract business. The assessee replied by a letter that it had never taken any contract of teh-bazari. The ITO, however, was not satisfied. He passed an assessment order to the best of his…
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