Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1992 (9) TMI 17

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rder dated April 22, 1960, the Rajasthan High Court sanctioned a scheme of arrangement. for the amalgamation of Messrs. Rajputana General Dealers Ltd. and Messrs. Merchandise and Stores Ltd. incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. On May 20, 1960, the High Court of Punjab at Delhi also passed an order under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, for amalgamation of the said Rajputana General Dealers Ltd. and the Merchandise and Stores Ltd. with the petitioner-Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. having its registered office at P.O. Birla Lines, Delhi. After amalgamation, Messrs. Rajputana General Dealers Ltd. and Messrs. Merchandise and Stores Ltd. stood dissolved as from May 20, 1960, when the certified copy of the order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... existence throughout the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1960-61. On the merits, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the levy of additional super-tax and dismissed the two appeals. Against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, appeals. were preferred by the petitioner-company before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal repelled the contention of the petitioner-company that as the petitioner was not an assessee, no tax could be imposed on it under section 23A of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal held that in fact the proceedings had been initiated and continued against the Birla company and, therefore, the proceedings were valid in view of clause 6 of the scheme of amalgamation. The Tribunal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ade the following observations (see [1980] 123 ITR 354, 367, 368) : "If the Income-tax Officer had demanded the tax on the basis of the orders passed from the Birla company without any jurisdiction, the Birla company could have got the demands quashed by filing a writ petition and seeking a writ of certiorari or prohibition. But when the Birla company was not the assessee and so long as there is no provision under which it could be held responsible for the liabilities of the erstwhile companies, it had no standing to prefer any appeals against the orders passed against the defunct companies." However, Mr. Justice D. R. Khanna expressed a contrary opinion oh the desirability of making observations with regard to the right of the petition .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ns raised were returned unanswered. The necessary effect is that the judgments of the Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner became final by which the petitioner had been held liable to pay super-tax under section 23A of the Income-tax Act. The assessment order of the Income-tax Officer went unassailed. The rights of the parties could be governed by the order of the Income-tax Officer subsequently upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Those judgments and orders could not be challenged by means of the present writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner urged that as one of the learned judges remarked in his decision that the petitioner could file a writ and challenge the validity of the assessment order made un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Salonah Tea Co. Ltd. v. Superintendent of Taxes [1988] 173 ITR 42. The Supreme Court held at page 46 of 173 ITR (at page 427 of 194 ITR): "The Supreme Court held that where the assessment had been made without jurisdiction, it was manifest that the respondents had no authority to retain the money that had been collected and it was liable to be refunded. The question was whether, under article 226, the court should direct the refund. The court said, 'Normally speaking, in a society governed by rule of law, taxes should be paid by citizens as soon as they are due in accordance with law. Equally, as a corollary of the said statement of law, it follows that taxes collected without the authority of law, as in this case, from a citizen should b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates