| Case ID |
262f46bb-6c29-40ea-be83-151c8546ec9b |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
CIVIL WRIT No. 1085 OF 1962 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 15, 1965 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The final decision of this case involves the relevance of the Income-tax Officer's jurisdiction to reopen assessments finalized before April 1, 1952, particularly under Section 35(5) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The Court held that the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to reopen the assessment of the joint Hindu family firm known as Messrs. Fateh Chand-Jai Ram Das, as the assessment had already been finalized prior to the stipulated date. The decision also emphasized the conflicting judgments from the Supreme Court regarding similar issues, leading to the necessity of referring the matter to a larger bench for clarification. Consequently, the enhanced assessment by the Income-tax Officer was deemed without jurisdiction and was quashed along with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India concerning the reopening of an income tax assessment for a joint Hindu family firm, Messrs. Fateh Chand-Jai Ram Das, who were partners in another firm, Messrs. Ambala Flour Mills. The assessment for the year 1948-49 had been finalized in 1950, but the Income-tax Officer sought to reopen it based on a subsequent assessment of the partnership. The petitioners contended that the reopening was not permissible as the original assessment was concluded before April 1, 1952, which was supported by various Supreme Court decisions. The court acknowledged the conflicting precedents and decided that the matter warranted review by a larger bench, ultimately quashing the Income-tax Officer's orders due to lack of jurisdiction. This case highlights the complexities of tax law, particularly in the context of partnership assessments and the authority of tax officials, making it significant for both legal practitioners and tax professionals. |
| Court |
Punjab High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Messrs. Fateh Chand-Jai Ram Das,
Messrs. Ambala Flour Mills
|
| Judges |
S.B. Capoor,
Inder Dev Dua,
D.K. Mahajan
|
| Lawyers |
D.C. Gupta,
M.R. Aggarwal,
D.N. Awasthy,
B.S. Gupta
|
| Petitioners |
Ram Bhagat
|
| Respondents |
Commissioner of INCOME TAX
|
| Citations |
1966 SLD 265,
(1966) 61 ITR 146
|
| Other Citations |
Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. v. S.G. Mehta, Income-tax Officer [1963] 48 ITR (SC) 154,
Kundan Lal v. Income-tax Officer [1959] 37 ITR 337,
Second Addl. ITO, Guntur v. Atmala Nagraj [1962] 46 ITR 609 (SC),
ITO v. S.K. Habibullah [1962] 44 ITR 809 (SC)
|
| Laws Involved |
Indian Income-tax Act, 1922,
Constitution of India
|
| Sections |
32(5),
35(1),
35(5),
Article 226
|