Case Details

Citation(s)
1968 SLG 144 1968 SLD 144 (1968) 70 ITR 807
Delhi High Court
CIVIL WRIT No. 598-D OF 1963, MARCH 18, 1968
INDER DEV DUA, C.J. AND T.V.R. TATACHARI, J.
Ved Vyasa and N.N. Goswami for the Petitioner. B.N. Kirpal and A.N. Kirpal for the
Respondent

Jamshedpur Engineering & Machine Manufacturing Co. (P.) Ltd.

VS

Union of India

Law:

Section:

Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 5(8) of Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] read with article 226 of Constitution of India - Central Board of Direct Taxes - Instructions to subordinate authorities - Whether no appellate power is conferred on Central Board in regard to everything done by all officers and persons employed in execution of Act - Held, yes - Petitioner-company had registered office in Jamshedpur in State of Bihar - It carried on its business there - It was assessed to income-tax by ITO, Jamshedpur - On appeal, Tribunal passed order in assessee's favour - However, those orders were not complied by ITO, IAC and Commissioner, Bihar - Application filed by assessee was considered by Central Board of Revenue - However, Central Board declined to interfere in this matter - Resultantly, instant writ petition came to be heard by Delhi High Court - Whether since officer to whom Tribunal gave directions were outside jurisdiction of Delhi High Court, it had no jurisdiction over matter - Held, yes - Whether contention that since money realised from petitioner had gone to coffers of Union of India and Delhi High Court had merely to direct Union of India to refund amount, had no merit and it was too tenuous to sustain plea of jurisdiction of Delhi High Court, on facts and circumstances of instant case - Held, yes Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 5(8) of Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Central Board of Direct Taxes - Instructions to subordinate authorities - Held yes FACTS .On a second appeal against the assessment order for the assessment year 1953-54, the Tribunal decided that a particular sum could not be the income, profits or gains of the assessee, and that it was only in the accounting year when the assessee, as agent of the society in question, would in fact receive the refund granted by the department that in pursuance of the agreement between the assessee and the society, one half of that sum would accrue or arise to the assessee and as such would be the income, profits or gains of the assessee liable to assessment. The assessee failed to have the Tribunal's order obeyed and carried out by the ITO…
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