Hercules Trading Corporation (P) Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Calcutta - Court Judgment
|Court||Supreme Court of India|
|Case Number||Civil Appeal No. 1382 of 1973|
|Judge|| R.S. Pathak and; V.D. Tulzapurkar, JJ.|
|Reported in||1982(1)SCALE544; (1982)2SCC32|
|Acts||Income Tax Act, 1961- Sections 266(2); Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 23(3) and 34(1)|
|Appellant||Hercules Trading Corporation (P) Limited|
|Respondent||Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Calcutta|
.....of indian income tax act, 1922 - assessee's claim of loss incurred in sale of property denied on reassessment - such reassessment made on ground that at time of assessment assessee suppressed material facts regarding such transaction - high court dismissed assessee's application to make reference - high court justified in refusing to make reference as no question of law involved in the case.
[s.r. das, c.j.,; b.p. sinha,; k. subba rao,; k.n. wanchoo and; n.h. bhagwati, jj.] the two petitioners were apprehended while attempting to smuggle a huge amount of indian and foreign currency and other contraband goods out of india and the collector of central excise and land customs passed orders confiscating the seized goods and imposing heavy personal penalties on both of them under s...........23(3) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 for the assessment year 1955-56. subsequently, the assessment proceedings were reopened under section 34(1)(a) of the act and the income-tax officer refused to allow a loss originally claimed by the appellant on the sale of an item of property purchased by it. the order under section 34(1)(a) was assailed by the appellant before the appellate assistant commissioner, who allowed the appeal on the finding that the notice was invalid. the income-tax appellate tribunal, on appeal filed by the income-tax department, took the view that the appellant had not disclosed all material facts before the income-tax officer during the original assessment and that therefore the reopening of the assessment proceedings under section 34(1)(a) was justified.3......
1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the High Court of Calcutta made under Section 266(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 declining to call for a statement of the case.
2. The appellant was assessed to Income-tax under Section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 for the assessment year 1955-56. Subsequently, the assessment proceedings were reopened under Section 34(1)(a) of the Act and the Income-tax Officer refused to allow a loss originally claimed by the appellant on the sale of an item of property purchased by it. The order under Section 34(1)(a) was assailed by the appellant before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who allowed the appeal on the finding that the notice was invalid. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, on appeal filed by the Income-tax Department, took the view that the appellant had not disclosed all material facts before the Income-tax Officer during the original assessment and that therefore the reopening of the assessment proceedings under Section 34(1)(a) was justified.
3. In this appeal, it has been strenuously urged by learned Counsel for the appellant that the view taken by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is erroneous and all the primary facts necessary for consideration of the loss were placed before the Income-tax Officer, and that therefore a question of law arose in the case. We have given the matter our anxious consideration and we are satisfied that the High Court is right in holding that no question of law arises in this case.
4. The appeal is dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs.