| Case ID |
2161c555-9aaf-4e76-beaa-382822e78efe |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
IT REFERENCE No. 251 OF 1971 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 04, 1978 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court held that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) could reopen assessments based on existing materials from the original records. It was determined that the rental income derived from letting out a studio building, previously assessed under the head 'Business', should have been assessed under 'Income from house property'. The Tribunal's conclusion that reopening was invalid due to lack of extraneous information was erroneous. The law does not require incontrovertible proof that income has escaped assessment before reopening can occur. The reassessment proceedings were thus validated, with the Tribunal directed to further investigate the information available to the ITO at the time of reassessment. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the reassessment of income tax for National Sound Studio (P.) Ltd., where the Income Tax Officer reopened assessments for the years 1962-63 and 1963-64. The main issue was whether the rental income from letting out a studio should be classified under 'Business' or 'Income from house property'. The court clarified that the ITO could rely on existing information to justify the reassessment. The decision emphasizes the importance of correct categorization of income and the powers of the ITO to rectify prior assessments based on new interpretations of existing facts. This case highlights the legal nuances surrounding income tax reassessments and the obligations of tax authorities to ensure accurate taxation, ultimately serving to protect the revenue. |
| Court |
Calcutta High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Commissioner of Income Tax,
National Sound Studio (P.) Ltd.
|
| Judges |
Dipak Kumar Sen,
C.K. Banerji
|
| Lawyers |
S. Sen,
S.K. Banerji
|
| Petitioners |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
| Respondents |
National Sound Studio (P.) Ltd.
|
| Citations |
1979 SLD 926 = (1979) 117 ITR 422
|
| Other Citations |
Anandji Haridas & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Kushare (S.P.), STO [1968] 21 STC 326 (SC),
Ballygunge Bank Ltd. v. CIT [1946] 14 ITR 409 (Cal.),
Bankipur Club Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 831 (SC),
Cenlon Finance Co. Ltd. v. Ellwood [1962] AC 782; [1965] 58 ITR 255 (HL),
Commercial Structures Ltd. v. Briggs [1948] 30 TC 477; [1949] 17 ITR (Supp.) 30 (CA),
CIT v. Dinesh Chandra H. Shah [1971] 82 ITR 367 (SC),
ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC),
IRC v. Mackinlay's Trustees [1938] 22 TC 305,
Kalyanji Mavji & Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC),
Parkin v. Cattell [1971] 48 TC 462 (CA)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
147
|