1995 PLP 1188 (PTD)
ASSAM FOREST PRODUCTS (P.) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
| Citation | 1995 PLP 1188 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | 211 I T R 447 |
| Bench Members | B.P. Jeevan Reddy and S.B. Majmudar, JJ |
| Parties | ASSAM FOREST PRODUCTS (P.) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX |
| Primary Law | Income-tax |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 1188 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income-tax as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 1188 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the 211 I T R 447 bench comprising: B.P. Jeevan Reddy and S.B. Majmudar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 1188 (PTD) (ASSAM FOREST PRODUCTS (P.) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- P.H. Parekh, Suneeta Sharma and Prerna Kohli for Appellant.
- J. Ramamoorthy, (Ranbir Chandra, Ms. A. Subhashini and S.N. Terdol with him) for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
(Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order, dated September 17, 1976, of the Gauhati High Court in. Income Tax Reference No.36 of 1974.
Reassessment
Cash credits
Enquiries after original assessment-- Proprietor of concern in whose name cash credits shown as loan
Statement to effect that he was a name-lender
Notice for reassessment
Valid-- Reassessment without placing statement before assessee
Tribunal remanding case to pass order after making enquiries
Order of remand does not give rise to question of law
Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.142(3) & 147(a). In its balance-sheet- for the period relevant to the assessment year 1964-65, the appellant company had shown a sum of Rs.60,000 as a loan from SJC. Ltd. After the original assessment on the appellant company was completed, enquiries revealed that there was no such company, but there was a proprietary concern of the name of SJC owned by BN. Relying on the statement of B to the effect that he had lent his name to various parties to enable them to bring in their concealed- income in the form of loans, the Income-tax Officer issued a reassessment notice under section 147(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and made a reassessment bringing to tax the sum of Rs.60,000 as the appellant's income from undisclosed sources, and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the assessment. The Appellate Tribunal held the reassessment notice to be valid but remanded the case to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to make enquiries, since the statement of B had not been placed before the appellant company to prove that the statement was not correct. On a reference, ' the High Court (See (1977) 110 ITR 558) upheld the validity of the notice and also held that the Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter for further enquiry. On appeal to the Supreme Court: Held, affirming the decision of the High Court, (i) that the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147(a) were valid; Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC) fol. (ii) That the question regarding the justification of the order of remand made by the Tribunal was not a question of law. Assam Forest Products (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1977)110 ITR 558 affirmed.
Judgment & Decree
In view of the decision of this Court in Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO (1993) 203 ITR 456, the plea raised herein by the assessee does not merit consideration. In view of the said decision, question No. l has necessarily to be answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. We order accordingly. So far as question No.2 is concerned, since it is merely an order of remand, it cannot be said to constitute a question of law which merits consideration by us. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. M.BA./957/T.F. Appeal dismissed.