Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Calcutta Vs. Daulatram Rawatmall - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in[1970]78ITR318(SC)
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax (Central), Calcutta
RespondentDaulatram Rawatmall
Excerpt:
.....income tax act, 1922 - commissioner approached high court under section 66 (2) against decision of tribunal - high court issued rule and dismissed petition without any reason - appeal before supreme court - court said that high court not justified in dismissing petition without any reason - order of high court set aside - appeal allowed and case remanded to high court to be decided in accordance with law. - labour & services back wages: [tarun chatterjee & v.s. sirpurkar, jj] termination of services - re-instatement - acquittal of an employee in a criminal proceeding on benefit of doubt held, employer has a right to decide whether or not such an employee deserves any salary for the intervening period. there is no inflexible rule that in every case when an employee is exonerated from.....j.c. shah j.1. in proceedings for levy of penalty under the indian income-tax act, 1922, which were carried in appeal to the income-tax appellate tribunal, calcutta bench, the tribunal was moved under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, for referring the following question to the high court at calcutta :whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty could be levied on the assessee under section 28(1)(c) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, for concealment of the fixed deposit of rs. 5,00,000 in the name of r. p. agarwal 2. the tribunal was of the view that the question was not capable of reference to the high court and one of the reasons set out by the tribunal was that the question assumed that there was concealment of the fixed deposit of rs. 5,00,000 in the.....
Judgment:

J.C. Shah J.

1. In proceedings for levy of penalty under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which were carried in appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, the Tribunal was moved under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for referring the following question to the High Court at Calcutta :

Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty could be levied on the assessee under Section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for concealment of the fixed deposit of Rs. 5,00,000 in the name of R. P. Agarwal

2. The Tribunal was of the view that the question was not capable of reference to the High Court and one of the reasons set out by the Tribunal was that the question assumed that there was concealment of the fixed deposit of Rs. 5,00,000 in the name of R.P. Agarwal by the assessee.

3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal a petition was moved under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, by the Commissioner of Income-tax before the High Court at Calcutta. The High Court issued a rule and after hearing counsel dismissed the petition without recording any reasons.

4. In our judgment the High Court was not justified in dismissing the petition without any reasons. Whether the question whether penalty was leviable in the circumstances of the case on the assumption sought to be involved in the question or with modification, arose out of the order of the Tribunal had to be dealt with by the High Court and for rejecting the petition some reasons had to be given. Since the High Court has not chosen to give any reasons, we set aside the order of the High Court and direct that the case be remanded to the High Court to be dealt with and disposed of in accordance with law. There will be no order as to costs in this appeal. We express no opinion on the merits of the case.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //