Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rectification income tax act section 154 Year: 1962 Page 1 of about 55 results (0.153 seconds)

Jan 24 1962 (SC)

income-tax Officer, V Circle, Madras, and anr. Vs. S.K. Habibullah

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-24-1962

Reported in : AIR1962SC918a; [1962]44ITR809(SC); (1963)IMLJ107(SC); [1962]Supp2SCR716

..... the assessees' share in the firm. it is not a mistake apparent from the record but a mistake discovered from the disposal of another case.' 5. section 35(1) of the income-tax act could not therefore be resorted to by the income-tax authorities for rectification of the assessments of the assessee, for there was no error apparent from the record of those assessments. 6. the ..... in which it now exists) by the indian finance act, 1956, dealt with the rectification consequent upon proceedings in reassessment under section 34(1)(a) or section 31(1a). the legislature by a fiction ..... was a partner. clause (6) dealt with recomputation of total income of an assessee in consequence of modifications made in the excess profits tax or the business profits tax payable by an assessee subsequent to an assessment made under the indian income-tax act. clause (7) dealt with rectification consequent upon modification of orders under section 23a of the income-tax act and clause (8), which was enacted (in the form .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 14 1962 (SC)

The Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing Co., Ltd. Vs. S.C. Mehta, Incom ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-14-1962

Reported in : AIR1963SC1436; [1963]48ITR154(SC); [1963]Supp2SCR92

..... another (s. 34). both these sections which enable reopening of back assessments provide their own periods of time for action but all these periods of time, whether for the first assessment or for rectification, or for re-assessment, merely create a bar when that time passes against the machinery set-up by the income-tax act for the assessment and levy of ..... certified the case as fit for appeal and hence the present appeal. 28. section 35 deals with rectification of mistakes. prior to 1939, rectification of any mistake apparent from the record could be made within one year of the order of assessment but by the indian income-tax (amendment) act, 1939 (7 of 1939), the period of four years was substituted for one ..... sub-section (1) shall apply accordingly, the ..... the corresponding assessment for income-tax (whether before or after the commencement of the indian income-tax (amendment) act, 1953), and in consequence thereof it is necessary to re-compute the total income of the assess chargeable to income-tax, such re-computation shall be deemed to be a rectification of a mistake apparent from the record within the meaning of this section and the provision of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1962 (HC)

Sayaji Mills Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Nov-07-1962

Reported in : [1964]54ITR97(Guj)

..... income-tax officer in the purported exercise of his powers under section 35 issued an order of rectification on 27th july, 1950. after making the requisite adjustments, a net refund of rs. 9,817-14-0 was found due to the assessee. on 12th december, 1950, the income-tax officer sought the sanction of the commissioner for taking proceedings under section 34 of the indian income-tax act ..... in force immediately before the commencement of the ordiance, were extended to all the merged states including the former state of baroda. the ordinance also introduced section 60a in the indian income-tax act, 1922. section 60a provided that if the central government considered it necessary to expedient so to do for avoiding any hardship or anomaly, or removing any difficulty that ..... on 3rd april, 1957, reversed the order of the appellate assistant commissioner and came to the conclusion that the income-tax officer was entitled to take proceedings under section 34. the assessee applied to the tribunal under section 66 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, to refer a question of law arising out of the order of the tribunal for decision by the ..... as a resident requiring the assessee to file a return. the said notice was issued under section 22(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922. on 16th january, 1950, the assessee filed a return. on 21st january, 1950, the income-tax officer issued a notice under section 22(4) requiring the assessee to produce certain documents on 22nd february, 1950. on 22nd february .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 12 1962 (SC)

M. Chockalingam and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras and an ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-12-1962

Reported in : AIR1963SC1456; [1963]48ITR34(SC); (1963)IMLJ65(SC); [1963]Supp1SCR599

..... was sent to either brother and the income-tax officer ordered the levy of penal interest as ..... appellants had not paid advance tax according to their own estimate of the income for these two years and they were liable to penal interest under section 18a(8) of the income-tax act. the income-tax officer, karaikudi, overlooked this fact and did not add penal interest to the tax leviable. in 1956 the income-tax officer stated proceedings under section 35 of the income-tax act for the rectification of the assessment. no notice ..... follows :- i. on chockalingam1951-52 rs. 13,391-7-01952-53 rs. 8,281/-ii. on meyyappan1951-52 rs. 13,440-11-01952-53 rs. 8,254-6-0 3. there is no appeal against the order under section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 1962 (SC)

income-tax Officer, North Satara Vs. Arvind N. Mafatlal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-27-1962

Reported in : AIR1963SC493; [1962]45ITR271(SC); [1962]Supp3SCR455

..... paid thereon. he averred that this was a mistake' apparent from the records and stated that he intended to rectify the same under s. 35 of the income tax act.. the four assessees objected to the rectification, but almost the entirely of the grounds on which the objection was based related to the legality of the original assessment and the assessees desired that if ..... well as the corresponding grossing up under 16(2). on that basis the only persons who were entitled to be treated as shareholders to whom the provisions of sections 16(2) and 18(5) of the income-tax act were attracted were the three partners in whose names the forty shares stood registered, as detailed earlier. an error had therefore been committed by the ..... ground which does not involve any consideration of the correctness of the construction adopted by the high court of section 16(2) of the income-tax act. this court has held in messrs. howrah trading co., ltd. v. commissioner of income-tax, that it is only the registered shareholder who is entitled to the benefit of the credit for ..... firm. in such circumstances the learned judges held that what was distributed to the individual partners could not be deemed to be dividend income within section 16(2) of the income-tax act. it is to test the correctness of this construction of section 16(2) that these appeals have been preferred. 4. in our opinion, however, the appeals have to be dismissed on a short .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1962 (HC)

Ekambarappa Vs. Additional Income-tax Officer, Bellary

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-22-1962

Reported in : [1963]49ITR692(KAR); [1963]49ITR692(Karn)

..... ' share in the firm. it is not a mistake apparent from the record but a mistake discovered from the disposal of another case.' section 35(1) of the income-tax act could not therefore be resorted to by the income-tax authorities for rectification of the assessments of the assessee, for there was no error apparent from the record apparent from the record of those assessments' 12 ..... . at page 812, the learned judge dealt with the scope of clause (5) of section 35. this is what his lordship says : 'clause (5) was ..... .1. these petitions raise one common question of law and that is that the impugned notices were issued long after the period fixed under section 35(5) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (to be referred to as the act hereinafter), and, therefore, they are invalid. the petitioners are the partners of a firm known as 'guduthur thimmappa & brothers'. on september 8, 1960, they ..... one of a group of clauses, added by act 25 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1962 (HC)

Ethel Rodrigues Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Estate Duty-c ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-08-1962

Reported in : ILR1962KAR671; [1963]49ITR128(KAR); [1963]49ITR128(Karn)

..... share in the firm. it is not a mistake apparent from the record but a mistake discovered from the disposal of another case. section 35(1) of the income-tax act could not therefore be resorted to by the income-tax authorities for rectification of the assessments of the assessee, for there was no error apparent from the record of those assessments.' 6. the ratio of this ..... discovery of an apparent mistake in the records of assessment and not in any other record. section 61 of the act corresponds to section 35(1) of the indian income-tax act. the language of the two sections are more or less identical. construing the scope of section 35(1) of the indian income-tax act, this is what was observed by shah j., who spoke for the supreme court in ..... he can rectify the error and the error which can be corrected may be an error of factor an error of law. in that case, the scope of the section 35 of the income-tax act vis-a-vis the scope of order 47, rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, was considered by the court. i do not think that decision is ..... income-tax act officer v. s. k. habibullah : 'section 35(1) empowers the income-tax authorities to rectify mistakes apparent from the record .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 1962 (HC)

Ethel Rodrigues Vs. Asst. Controller of Estate Duty, Estate Duty Cum-i ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-08-1962

Reported in : AIR1964Kant202; AIR1964Mys202

..... ' share in the firm. it is not a mistake apparent from the record but a mistake discovered from the disposal of another case.' section 35(1) of the income-tax act could not therefore be resorted to by the income-tax authorities for rectification of the assessment of the assessee, for there was no error apparent from the record of those assessments.' the ratio of this decision ..... discovery of an apparent mistake in the records of assessment and not in any other record. section 61 of the act corresponds to section 35(1) of the indian income-tax act. the language of the two sections is more or less identical. construing the scope of section 35(1) of the indian income-tax act, this is what was observed by shah, j. who spoke for the supreme court in ..... , he can rectify the error, and the error which can be rectified may be an error of fact or an error of law. in that case, the scope of section 35 of the. income-tax act vis-a-vis the scope of order 47, rule 1, c. p. c. was considered by the court. i do not think that that decision is of any ..... income-tax officer v. s. k. habibullah; air 1962 sc 918. 'section 35(1) empowers the income-tax authorities to rectify mistake .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1962 (HC)

Central Indian Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward Indor ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-09-1962

Reported in : [1963]47ITR895(MP)

..... articles 226 and 227 of the constitutions is directed against an order dated may 27, 1961, by which the appellate assistant commissioner, indore, rectified under section 35 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter called the act), an order of his predecessor-in-office dated may 29, 1957. by the impugned order, the losses allowed to be carried forward and set off ..... that of order xlvii, rule i, civil procedure code. the language of the two is different because according to section 35 of the act which provides for rectification of mistakes the power is given to the various income-tax authorities within four years from the date of any assessment passed by them to rectify any mistake apparent from the record and in the civil procedure code the ..... by this section is not one which is to be discovered as a result ..... was justified in the present case in exercising his power under section 35 and rectifying the said mistakes'.in maharana mills (private) ltd. v. income-tax officer, porbandar, their lordships recalled what they had said in the first case and stated :'the power under section 35 is no doubt limited to rectification of mistakes which are apparent from the record. a mistake contemplated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1962 (HC)

N. Vs. T. Haji Syed Ibrahim Rowther V. Income-tax Officer, Cuddalore, ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-30-1962

Reported in : [1963]47ITR665(Mad)

..... order of rectification is that the inclusion of the sum of rs. 4,924 as the share income of the petitioner of the colombo firm based upon the order of the income-tax officer assessing the firm is illegal and without jurisdiction. the colombo firm is admittedly a 'non-resident' within the meaning of the expression under section 4 of the indian income-tax act. persons who ..... the present case such irregularity of procedure as has occurred cannot in any way vitiate the order of rectification now impugned before us.the petitioner had ample opportunity to resist the rectification proceedings under section 35 of the act on the ground that the income-tax officer could not take into account the assessment proceedings of the non-resident firm and also on the ..... to my proposal and your assessment will be revised accordingly.'the petitioner admittedly failed to take any objection before the income-tax officer against the proposed revision or rectification. on march 1, 1956, the officer passed an order revising the original assessment under section 35 of the act, the result of which was to reader the petitioner liable for the payment of additional ..... other matters as well.the show cause notice issued to the petitioner by the income-tax officer as a result of his having taken action under section 35 of the act makes it quite clear that, in the absence of any valid objection that may be raised by the petitioner, rectification will be made in the manner proposed. if the petitioner, having received .....

Tag this Judgment!


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