| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1966 SLG 389 1966 SLD 389 (1966) 61 ITR 461 |
Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1062 AND 1063 OF 1966, APRIL 15, 1966
K.N. WANCHOO, J.C. SHAH AND S.M. SIKRI, JJ.
R.M. Hazarnavis, N. D. Karkhanis, R.H. Dhebar and R.N. Sachthey for the Appellant. A.K. Sen, T.A. Ramachandran, J.B. Dadachanji, O.C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain for the
Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1062 AND 1063 OF 1966, APRIL 15, 1966
K.N. WANCHOO, J.C. SHAH AND S.M. SIKRI, JJ.
R.M. Hazarnavis, N. D. Karkhanis, R.H. Dhebar and R.N. Sachthey for the Appellant. A.K. Sen, T.A. Ramachandran, J.B. Dadachanji, O.C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain for the
Respondent
Commissioner of Wealth Tax
v.
Imperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd.
Law:
Section:
Section 27 (3) , read with section 17(5), of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - High Court - Reference to - Assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59 - Respondent-assessee claimed deduction being provision for contingencies which was allowed by WTO for years in question - However for assessment year 1959-60, WTO disallowed aforesaid provision - Pending appeal before AAC, WTO issued reassessment notice under section 17(b) and passed reassessment orders and amount of said provision for contingencies was included in net wealth of respondent - On second appeal, Tribunal held that WTO did not have any information in his possession on basis of which he believed that net wealth chargeable to tax had escaped assessment - Reference application filed by revenue was also rejected - Application filed under section 27(3) was also rejected by High Court - Whether it is settled that "information" in section 34(1)(b) of Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 includes information as to true and correct state of law and so would cover information as to relevant judicial decision - Held, yes - Whether language of section 17(b) is pari materia with language of section 34(1)(b) of Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and, therefore, decisions under section 34(1)(b) could be relevant in construing scope and effect of section 17(b) - Held, yes - Whether fact that there was divergence of opinion among High Courts as to meaning of word "information" in section 34(1)(b) of Income-tax Act, 1922, a question of law did arise out of order of Tribunal as to interpretation of word "information" in section 17(b) - Held, yes FACTS For the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59, the respondent claimed deduction of certain amount being the provision for the contingencies. The WTO allowed the assessee's claim and completed the assessments. However, while completing assessment for the assessment year 1959-60, the WTO disallowed the claim for deduction of the provision for contingencies. Thereafter, the WTO issued two notices under section 17(b) for reassessment of net wealth for the years 1957-58 and 1958-59. Orders of reassessment under section 16(3), read with section 17(b) were passed in respect of the assessment years 1957-58…
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