Skip to content


James Finlay and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtKolkata High Court
Decided On
Case NumberIncome-tax Reference No. 102 of 1979
Judge
Reported in[1987]163ITR495(Cal)
ActsIncome Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 261 and 271(1)
AppellantJames Finlay and Co. Ltd.
RespondentCommissioner of Income-tax
Appellant AdvocateA.N. Bhattacharji, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateDebi Pal and ;M. Seal, Advs.
Excerpt:
- .....issue and if the assessee proceeds on the basis of one view, whether there is deliberate concealment so as to attract penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the act ?4. this court in ito v. burmah shell storage and distributing company of india ltd. : [1987]163itr496(cal) and in the case of jeewanlal (1929) ltd. v. ito : [1981]130itr405(cal) , took a view in favour of the assessee on the issue. in the judgment before us, a view in favour of the revenue has been taken.5. we find this is a fit case for appeal to the supreme court and a certificate under section 261 of the act is directed to be issued. there will also be an order in terms of prayer (b).6. let the order directing issue of certificate be drawn up separately.g.n. ray, j.7. i agree.
Judgment:

Dipak Kumar Sen, J.

1. In this application under Section 261 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the petitioner contends that substantial questions of law arise from the judgment in the above reference from which an appeal is sought to be preferred to the Supreme Court by the assessee.

2. Relying on a circular issued by the Central Board of Revenue No. 27(44-IT/52) dated 6th October, 1952, which was in force at the relevant time, the assessee credited interest receivable from his debtors in a suspense account instead of disclosing it in its return based on accounts kept on mercantile basis.

3. The substantial question of general importance which arises is that if there are two views on a particular issue and if the assessee proceeds on the basis of one view, whether there is deliberate concealment so as to attract penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act ?

4. This court in ITO v. Burmah Shell Storage and Distributing Company of India Ltd. : [1987]163ITR496(Cal) and in the case of Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd. v. ITO : [1981]130ITR405(Cal) , took a view in favour of the assessee on the issue. In the judgment before us, a view in favour of the Revenue has been taken.

5. We find this is a fit case for appeal to the Supreme Court and a certificate under Section 261 of the Act is directed to be issued. There will also be an order in terms of prayer (b).

6. Let the order directing issue of certificate be drawn up separately.

G.N. Ray, J.

7. I agree.


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