9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (8) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come-tax Act, 1922 (Hereafter referred to as " the Act "). Messrs. Motor General Sales (P.) Ltd. is the assessee. The proceedings under consideration relate to the assessment year 1957-58. The assessee was provisionally assessed for the year 1956-57 under section 23B of the Act on August 30, 1956. The assessee-company was assessed under section 23 of the Act for the first time on July 4, 1957. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. The Income-tax Officer, Lucknow, appealed against the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The appeal was, however, dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad. At the request of the Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P., the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court : " Whether the assessment made under section 23B on the assessee for 1956-57 on Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Of section 18A(3) of the Act. This point came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in an appeal from this court. The decision is reported in Income-tax Officer, Kanpur v. Mani Ram. In that case the assessee had been provisionally assessed under section 23B of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment year 1954-55. It filed returns for the years 1955-56 to 1958-59, but had not sent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection (3) of section 18A of the Act. The assessee could not be said to have committed a breach of sub-section (3) of section 18A of the Act. The assessee was not liable to any penalty under clause (b) of sub-section (9) of section 18A of the Act. Our answer to the question referred to the court is that the assessment made under section 23B on the assessee for 1956-57, on August 30, 1956, had the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
