Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLG 1873 1991 SLD 1873 (1991) 190 ITR 227
Kerala High Court

K.S. PARIPOORNAN AND K.P. BALANARAYANA MARAR, 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

Nelliampathy Tea & Produce Co. Ltd.

v.

Commissioner of Agricultural IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 34 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1961 - Revision - Of orders prejudicial to interests of revenue - Assessment year 1969-70 - Whether even though section 34 does not provide any specific period to initiate revision proceedings under this section, yet it should be initiated within normal period provided under sections 35 and 36 and where these are initiated beyond aforesaid period, revenue should be able to demonstrate that there were circumstances beyond control or other supervening events or insurmountable difficulties - Held, yes FACTS The original assessment of the assessee-company pertaining to the assessment year 1969-70 was completed on 25-4-1972. During the year 1969-70, the assessee received certain amount towards the 'coffee pooled during the previous years'. This amount was excluded from the assessment for the assessment year 1970-71 treating the amount as income related to the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1969-70. However, it was not assessed for any previous year. Therefore, the Commissioner initiated proceedings under section 34 on 13-2-1979. The assessee submitted that the proceedings initiated were barred by limitation and, therefore, were illegal and invalid. The Commissioner did not accept the objections of the assessee and revised the assessment by an order dated 28-2-1982. On reference: HELD The Act does not provide any time limit within which the proceeding should be initiated. The power is vested in very wide terms. It is trite law that such statutory power must be exercised bona fide, reasonably, without negligence and for the purpose for which it is conferred. While it is true that no period of limitation is prescribed for initiation proceedings under section 34, action, if any, must be taken within a reasonable period. In the instant case, suo motu revision proceedings were initiated nearly 7 years after the final assessment and the revisional order was passed nearly 10 years after the aforesaid assessment was rendered. To reopen the final assessment after periods as provided under sections 35 and 36 in exercise of the powers under section 34, demands cogent and sufficient reasons. The power vested in…
🔒
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