Case Details

Citation(s)
1982 SLG 6 1982 SLD 6 1982 PTD 36 (1982) 45 TAX 36
Supreme Court of Bangladesh
Application No. 28 of 1978, decision dated: 4-08-1980
MUHAMMAD HUSAIN AND SULTAN HOSSAIN KHAN, JJ
S. M. Hossain with A. M. Mahmudur Rahman for Appellant. Habibul Islam Bhuiyan, for
Respondent

MRS. ZEBUNESSA

VS

COMMISSIONER OF TAXES, DACCA ZONE, DACCA

Law: Income Tax Act, 1922

Section: 34A

Income tax Act (XI of 1922)---S. 34 A Asscssment, revision of Assesses owner of house renting out same to a cultural Institute and subsequently introducing a firm allowing it to sublet such house to said cultural Institute and realise rent Firm realising rent from Institute at a higher rate whereas assesses owner receiving rent at a lower rate from such firm Such transaction through a third party believed and accepted by Income tax Officer but disbelieved by Inspecting Joint Commissioner and such Commissioner passing order for re assessment Held : Inspecting Joint Commissioner wide powers to pats any order as circumstances may justify including an order for enhancement and committed no illegality in directing a fresh assessment when Inspecting, Joint Commissioner disbelieved story about introduction of a house agent for subletting house to cultural Institute. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN, J. This is an application at the instance of the assesses under section 66 of the Income tax Act for the decision of this Court on the question whether the Tribunal rightly affirmed the order of the Inspecting Joint Commissioner to revise the assessment made by the Income tax Officer under section 34 A of the Income tax Act. The assessee owns a house in Dhanmndi Residential Area which was rented to the German Cultural Institute before the independence of Bangladesh. After the independence of Bangladesh there was no change in the ownership and the occupancy of the house in question. However, the assesses introduced a firm allowing them to sublet the house to the said German Cultural Institute and realise rent from them. The firm used to receive rent from the instituted at Taka 15,000 per month whereas the assessee being the owner of the house used to received Taka 4,000 per month from the said firm. This transaction through a third party though believed and accepted by the Income tax Officer but was disbelieved by the Inspecting Joint Commissioner who passes: an order for the revision of the assessment under section 34 A of the Income tax Act. The Tribunal also upheld the order of the Inspecting Joint Commissioner. It appears that both the Inspecting Joint Commissioner and the…
πŸ”’
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