Skip to content


Nachimuthu Gounder Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberTax Case No. 91 of 1977
Judge
Reported in[1977]109ITR256(Mad)
ActsTamil Nadu Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955 - Sections 34, 35, 54 and 54(1)
AppellantNachimuthu Gounder
RespondentCommissioner of Agricultural Income-tax
Advocates:S. Periyasami, Adv.
Cases ReferredM. V. S. Kathirvetu Nadar v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income
Excerpt:
- - section 54(1) of the act, as far as it is relevant, states that the assessee in the case of an order under section 34 enhancing the assessment or otherwise prejudicial to him may prefer an application to the high court against the order on the ground that the commissioner has either decided erroneously or failed to decide any question of law.ismail, j.1. against the order of the agricultural income-tax officer, dharapuram, dated 30th august, 1975, levying agricultural income-tax, the petitioner preferred a revision petition to the commissioner of agricultural income-tax, madras, under section 34 of the tamil nadu agricultural income-tax act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). the said officer by his impugned order dated 24th march, 1976, dismissed the revision petition. it is against the said order that the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition, purporting to be under section 54 of the act. we are of the opinion that this revision petition is not maintainable. section 54(1) of the act, as far as it is relevant, states that the assessee in the case of an order under section 34 enhancing the assessment or.....
Judgment:

Ismail, J.

1. Against the order of the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Dharapuram, dated 30th August, 1975, levying agricultural income-tax, the petitioner preferred a revision petition to the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Madras, under Section 34 of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The said officer by his impugned order dated 24th March, 1976, dismissed the revision petition. It is against the said order that the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition, purporting to be under Section 54 of the Act. We are of the opinion that this revision petition is not maintainable. Section 54(1) of the Act, as far as it is relevant, states that the assessee in the case of an order under Section 34 enhancing the assessment or otherwise prejudicial to him may prefer an application to the High Court against the order on the ground that the Commissioner has either decided erroneously or failed to decide any question of law. In this case, admittedly, there is no question of enhancing the assessment. The only other question is whether the order of the Commissioner can otherwise be said to be prejudicial to the petitioner herein. We are of the opinion that so long as the Commissioner has not interfered with the order of the Agricultural Income-tax Officer and placed the petitioner herein in a position worse than what he was when he approached the Commissioner, the order of the Commissioner merely dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioner cannot be said to be prejudicial to the petitioner. That is the view taken by a Bench of this court in M. V. S. Kathirvetu Nadar v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax : [1968]68ITR786(Mad) . Consequently, this revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable.


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