| Case ID |
173963ab-de96-42a0-98ba-47886899c534 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
D-2741 of 1936 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 28, 1939 |
| Hearing Date |
Jul 30, 1936 |
| Decision |
The court ruled that there was deliberate concealment of income by the assessee, who failed to report investments and profits in his account books. The Income-tax Officer and the Assistant Commissioner both found that the deductions claimed were not valid, and the penalties imposed were justified. The court upheld the findings of the tax authorities, stating that the method of computation adopted was correct, and the penalties for concealment were warranted due to the deliberate nature of the actions taken by the assessee. |
| Summary |
In the case of Lachhman Das Brijballabh Das, the Allahabad High Court addressed issues surrounding the concealment of income under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case involved the assessment year 1934-35, where the assessee was found guilty of not reporting significant investments and income from various properties and business activities, including money-lending and commission agency. The Income-tax Officer initially disallowed deductions for mortgage loans and other expenses, leading to a penalty under section 28 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The appellate authority and the Commissioner upheld findings of deliberate concealment, emphasizing that the income-tax authorities had correctly assessed the income and imposed penalties. The court’s decision reinforced the importance of accurate reporting of income and the consequences of willful neglect in financial disclosures, highlighting the legal responsibilities of taxpayers. The ruling serves as a precedent for similar cases involving tax evasion and the enforcement of penalties in cases of deliberate concealment of income. |
| Court |
Allahabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Collister,
Bajpai
|
| Lawyers |
Peare Lal Banerji,
Dr. N.P. Asthana
|
| Petitioners |
Lachhman Das Brijballabh Das
|
| Respondents |
Not available
|
| Citations |
1942 SLD 38 = (1942) 10 ITR 186
|
| Other Citations |
CIT v. Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga [1933] 1 ITR 94 (Pat.),
Raghunandan Prasad v. CIT [1933] 1 ITR 113 (PC)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961,
Indian Income-tax Act, 1922
|
| Sections |
271(1)(c),
28
|