Case ID |
41f31071-e16c-4c65-a23b-ed215099901f |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
WRIT PETITION No. 1064 OF 1972 |
Decision Date |
Sep 18, 1974 |
Hearing Date |
|
Decision |
The Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by R. Ramachandra Naidu challenging the order passed under section 132(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that the order could not be quashed as it was not capricious or mala fide. The Income-tax Officer (ITO) had conducted a search and seizure operation, determining a substantial tax liability based on estimated undisclosed income. The petitioner had also filed an appeal against the ITO's order, which was pending, and therefore it was deemed unnecessary for the court to interfere at this stage. The court emphasized the ITO's obligation to exercise caution and fairness in estimating undisclosed income and stated that the proceedings under section 132(5) are primarily concerned with the retention of the seized amount until a regular assessment is completed. |
Summary |
In the case of WRIT PETITION No. 1064 OF 1972, R. Ramachandra Naidu challenged an order made by the Income-tax Officer under section 132(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case revolved around a search and seizure operation resulting in the confiscation of cash and documents. The ITO estimated the undisclosed income, leading to a considerable tax liability. The petitioner argued that the ITO had not properly considered the evidence provided regarding the sources of income and investments, suggesting that the entire income should not be attributed to a single assessment year. The court ruled against the petitioner, emphasizing the need for the ITO to act fairly and honestly but ultimately upholding the retention of the seized assets pending further assessment. This case highlights the complexities of tax assessments and the legal standards expected of tax authorities in exercising their powers. Keywords related to this case include 'Income-tax Act', 'writ petition', 'search and seizure', 'tax assessment', and 'judicial review'. |
Court |
Madras High Court
|
Entities Involved |
Not available
|
Judges |
G. Ramanujam,
V. Ramaswami
|
Lawyers |
M.S. Venkatarama Iyer,
V. Krishnan,
P. Veeraraghavan,
P. Sampathkumar,
V. Balasubrahmanyan,
J. Jayaraman
|
Petitioners |
R. Ramachandra Naidu
|
Respondents |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
Citations |
1976 SLD 264,
(1976) 102 ITR 227
|
Other Citations |
Gulab & Co. v. Superintendent of Central Excise (Preventive), Trichy [1975] 98 ITR 581 (Mad.)
|
Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
Sections |
132,
139(2),
132(5)
|