Case Details

Citation(s)
1987 SLG 3175 1987 SLD 3175 (1987) 166 ITR 134
Supreme Court of India

R.S. PATHAK, C.J. AND RANGANATH MISRA, J.

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

Income Tax Officer

v.

Radheshyam Ladia

Law:

Section:

Section 147(a), read with section 148, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Reassessment - Non-disclosure of primary facts - After assessments for years 1960-61 to 1962-63 had been completed, ITO came to know that assessee had omitted to include in his total income capital gain arising to his wife from assets transferred to her by assessee without adequate consideration - Whether reopening of assessments for said years was valid - Held, no Facts After the assessments for the years 1960-61 to 1962-63 had been completed, the ITO came to know that the assessee had omitted to include in Ms total income capital gains arising to his wife from assets transferred to her by assessee without adequate consideration. The ITO issued notices under section 147(a), read with section 148 to the assessee for those years whereupon the assessee challenged the validity of the Impugned notices. The Division Bench of the High Court quashed the impugned notices. On appeal: Held The Supreme Court had held in the case of Muttlah Chettiar v. CIT [1969] 74 ITR 183 and Malegoan Electricity Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT[1970] 78 ITR 466 that by not showing the income of his wife and minor children, the assessee cannot be deemed to have failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment within the meaning of section 34(1)(a) of the 1922 Act. Following these decisions in the instant case, the Division Bench was justified in quashing the impugned notices issued under section 147(a), read with section 148. Decision of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in ITO v. Radheshyam Ladia [Appeal No. 131 of 1971] affirmed. Cases referred to V.D.M. RM. M. RM. Muthiah Chettiar v. CIT [1969] 74 ITR 183 (SC), Malegaon Electricity Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1970] 78 ITR 466(SC) and CIT v. Smt. P.K. Kochammu Amma [1980] 125 ITR 624 (SC). S.C. Manchanda, A. Subhashini for the Appellant. B.P. Maheshwari, S.P. Mittal and R.S. Rana for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Misra, J.-This appeal by the revenue is by certificate and is directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court which upheld the decision of a Single Judge in a writ petition quashing the notices issued to 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