Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rectification income tax act section 154 Year: 1957 Page 1 of about 45 results (0.170 seconds)

Jan 14 1957 (HC)

Arvind N. Mafatlal Vs. Income-tax Officer, North Satara

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-14-1957

Reported in : AIR1957Bom134; (1957)59BOMLR268; ILR1957Bom428; [1957]32ITR350(Bom)

..... phaltan state income-tax act has been repealed an order under section 35 of the income-tax act rectifying a mistake in an assessment order passed by the income-tax officer cannot be passed. even though the phaltan state income-tax act has been repealed by the taxation laws (extension to merged states and amendment) act, 1949, for purposes of levy, assessment and collection of income-tax and super-tax the phaltan income-tax act does survive, and rectification of ..... record' of the assessment. jurisdiction under section 35 of the act therefore is to rectify mistakes which are 'apparent from the record' and ..... be regarded as 'assessment' within the meaning of section 7 of the taxation laws (extension to merged states and amendment) act, 1949. 7. we are also unable to agree with the contention of mr. palkhivala that section 35 of the indian income-tax act contemplates rectification of mistakes which are clerical or arithmetical only. section 35 of the income-tax act enables the income-tax officer to rectify any mistake 'apparent from the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1957 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sheolal

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-18-1957

Reported in : AIR1958MP316; [1958]33ITR47(MP)

..... it in the accounting year 1946-47, which we think the appellate tribunal was authorised under section 35 of the income-tax act to rectify. we rely upon the decision of the bombay high court in sidhramappa v. commissioner of income-tax : [1952]21itr333(bom) (d) where the powers of rectification were considered by chagla, c. j. and tendolkar, j. we respectfully agree with the observations of ..... not. we have been taken through the provisions of sections 33 and 35 of the income-tax act. it was admitted before us that the income-tax appellate tribunal does not possess any power of review. shri thakkar, who appeared for the assessee, contended, however, that no review was involved inasmuch as at best it was a rectification of an obvious error on the previous occasion in ..... taking the accounting year as 1946-47 when it was the year previous to that. he contended, therefore, that even if the appellate tribunal did not purport to act under section 35 of the income-tax act the action of the appellate tribunal in rectifying the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1957 (HC)

M.L. Janardhanan Pillai Vs. Income-tax Officer, Alleppey

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-15-1957

Reported in : AIR1957Ker25; [1958]33ITR111(Ker)

..... final assessment evidenced by ext. c or subsequently, until he filed ext. d, dated 11-1-1958, a petition for rectification under section 48 of the travancore income-tax act, 1121 (corresponding to section 35 of the indian income-tax act, 1922).7. the rectification contemplated by section 48 is only of mistakes 'apparent from the record of the appeal, revision, assessment or refund as the case may be'. ..... 48/35 of the travancore/indian income-tax act' (ext f).8. it is agreed that in order to succeed thepetitioner must show (a) that the succession was in 1947; and (b) that the ..... ext. f, the order on ext. d, proceeds on the assumption that there is no such mistake :'there is no mistake for rectification under section ..... 1-1-1948'. if it were on 1-1-1948 the petitioner will not be entitled to any financial benefit by the application of section 35 (4) of the travancore income-tax act, 1121 (section 25 (4) of the indian income-tax act, 1022). the case of the affidavit of the petitioner filed in support of the petitioner is :'i discontinued my the said business on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 01 1957 (HC)

M. Kumaran Vs. First Additional Income-tax Officer, Kozhikode.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-01-1957

Reported in : [1958]33ITR290(Ker)

..... directed the petitioner to pay by way of penal interest a sum of rs. 5,308-9-0 on or before march 25, 1956.3. sub-section (1) of section 35 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, omitting the provisos thereto, reads as follows :'the commissioner or appellate assistant commissioner may, at any time within four years from the date of any order ..... herein.....the provisions of section 18a are mandatory in natrue and the omission to give effect to them when the requisite conditions were present, is ..... completing the assessment, the failure of the petitioner to file estimate of his total income, and pay advance tax under section 18a, and the consequent liability for penal interest, were, by an oversight, omitted to be considered. since the mistake was patent, action was taken under section 35 of the income-tax act, and the mistake was rectified by the order dated march 13, 1956, impugned ..... a mistake apparent on the record, rectifiable under section 35(1) of the act. accordingly the assessees objection against such rectification were invited in this office letter dated february 4, 1956. the assessee in his reply dated february 18, 1956, has stated that this is not a mistake apparent on the record and the income-tax officer has no power to review his own assessment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1957 (HC)

M. Parmanand and anr. Vs. Additional Income-tax Officer, Bangalore

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Nov-06-1957

Reported in : AIR1958Kant70; AIR1958Mys70; (1958)36MysLJ199

..... empowered the income-tax authorities to correct mistakes which were apparent on the face of it ..... should not be rectified. the income tax officer did rectify the mistake on 23-8-1955. the present petitions have been filed challenging the jurisdiction of the income tax officer to make the said rectifications.2. it would be necessary at this stage to set out the relevant provisions of the indian income tax act. section 35 of the indian income tax act as it originally stood and which ..... should be deemed part of the depreciation allowance for the subsequent year, that is, 1939-40, and should be allowed to be further carried forward under section 10 (2) (vi) of the income tax act, 1922. in the assessment year in question the assessee had that right and their lordships of the supreme court accepted the said contention of the assessee ..... 30-12-1954, in respect of their income for the assessment year 1950-51. in the order of assessment, which was made under section 23 (3) of the indian income tax act, it was stated that the assessment was made subject to revision under section 35 of the income tax act on determination of the correct share of income in the firms accounts.thereafter on 29th march .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 12 1957 (HC)

T. Manickavasagam Chettiar Vs. the Income-tax Officer

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-12-1957

Reported in : (1958)1MLJ201

..... . it is not now necessary to consider whether the attribution of the dividend in the assessment of the assessees for 1946-47 proceeds on a correct interpretation of section 16(2) of the income-tax act. but what i am concerned to point out is, that the inclusion of this dividend in the assessees' assessment for 1946-47 cannot obscure the fact that it ..... assessment of the petitioner he issued a notice on 8th april, 1953, calling for objections as to why the assessment should not be rectified under section 35. the assessee objected to the rectification on various grounds. but the income-tax officer overruling these objections passed an order on 30th june, 1953, rectifying the assessment as proposed. in this case also the petitioner filed similar ..... subsequent to the date of the assessment order against the petitioner. if as i have held the existence of an order under section 23-a even on the date of the assessment did not by itself justify the rectification under section 35 the present case appears to be a fortiori. on the date when the order of assessment was passed, it was right ..... disclose a distribution of dividend might be before the officer and available to him but this cannot justify the rectification of the assessment under section 35 by including the dividend from this company. this could only be done by resort to the provisions of section 34. this position also i do not understand the learned counsel for the department to contest.13. next .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 12 1957 (HC)

T. Manickavasagam Chettiar Vs. Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Coi ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-12-1957

Reported in : [1958]33ITR482(Mad)

..... being 1946-47. it is not now necessary to consider whether the attribution dividend in the assessment of the assessee for 1946-47 proceeds on a correct interpretation of section 16(2) of income-tax act. but what i am concerned to point out is, that the inclusion of this dividend in the assessees assessment for 1946-47 cannot obscure the fact that it ..... assessment of the petitioner he issued a notice on april 18, 1953, calling for objections as to why the assessment should not be rectified under section 35. the assessee objected to the rectification on various grounds. but the income-tax officer overruling these objections passed an order on june 30, 1953, rectifying the assessment as proposed. in this case also the petitioner filed similar ..... subsequent to the date of the assessment order against the petitioner. if, as i have held, the existence of an order under section 23a even on the date of the assessment did not by itself justify the rectification under section 35 the present case appears to be a fortiori. on the date when the order of assessment was passed, it was right. the ..... disclose a distribution of dividend might be before the officer and available to him but this not justify the rectification of assessment under section 35 by including the dividend from this company. this could only be done by resort to the provision of section 34. this position also i did not understand the learned counsel for the department to contest.next comes the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 1957 (HC)

S. T. Velu Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-10-1957

Reported in : AIR1958Mad534; [1958]33ITR463(Mad)

..... had no jurisdiction to make the demand. i have no hesitation in overruling this contention. subsection (4) of section 35, on which this argument is based, runs :'whether any such rectification has the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing re fund the income-tax officer shall serve on the assessee a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum payable, and ..... petition seeking the quashing of an order of the income-tax officer, dated february 24, 1956, by which the assessment of the petitioner was revised under section 35 of the income-tax act.the petitioner was a non-resident and for the assessment year 1951-52, an order was passed computing his income at rs. 11,703 and levying income-tax at the rate appropriate to an assessee who ..... had not opted under section 17(1) of the act. the sum due in respect of the ..... such notice of demand shall be deemed to be issued under section 29, and the provisions of this act shall apply accordingly.'this only means .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 1957 (HC)

W.P.A. Soundarapandian and Brothers by Partner W.P.A.S. Bhaskaran and ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-06-1957

Reported in : (1957)2MLJ434

..... relevant portion of section 36(1) runs:.the agricultural income-tax officer may at any time within three years from the date of any assessment. ...order passed ..... the circumstances of this case the jurisdiction conferred by section 36 of the act could not have been invoked or exercised by the agricultural income-tax officer, must prevail, it may not be necessary to examine all the other pleas of the petitioners.14. section 36, which is analogous to section 35 of the income-tax act, provides for the rectification of mistakes apparent from the record of assessment. the ..... completed and final assessment. section 19 of the act provides for cancellation of an assessment in certain cases. section 31(5)(a)(ii) provides for a fresh assessment, where the original order of assessment passed by the agricultural income-tax officer is set aside on appeal. section 35 is a provision for assessing the income that had escaped assessment. section 36 provides for rectification of mistakes in the orders .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 1957 (HC)

Regional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax and ors. Vs. Ghanshyamdas ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-13-1957

Reported in : AIR1958MP148; [1958]9STC179(MP)

..... the course of argument to several cases decided by the privy council and other high courts in india on the subject of the law of income-tax. an analogy from the limitation prescribed in section 34 of the income-tax act was taken for the purposes of showing that the same kind of limitation must be deemed to be applicable to the present statute,6. the ..... in the first instance.19. reliance was placed upon certain rulings in which the period of limitation prescribed by section 34 of the indian income-tax act was sought to be made applicable to action under section 22 of that act. we have already pointed out that income-tax is a temporary measure from year to year, and the assessment has to be made within a particular time ..... has been made and there is something which needs to be corrected or some' assessment to be added to the assessment, already made that section 11-a comes into the picture. whenever such a contingency arises the rectification of the assessment for any of the four reasons detailed by us above has to be made within three calendar years as stated in ..... the section. this limitation cannot be read backwards into section 11.as their lordships themselves observed, following the dictum of rankin c. j., there is no action .....

Tag this Judgment!


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