Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court upholds tax law amendments, dismisses revision petitions, and validates reassessment orders.</h1> The court dismissed the tax revision petitions, upholding the retrospective amendment of Section 16 and the validating provision in Section 3 of Tamil ... - Issues Involved:1. Validity of reassessment orders under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.2. Retrospective amendment of Section 16 and its implications.3. Validity of the validating provision in Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Act No. 18 of 1966.4. Estimation of suppressed turnover and assessment of penalty.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of reassessment orders under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959:The assessing officer initially determined the total turnover and taxable turnover for the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63 based on the account books and additional sums due to discrepancies. Subsequent surprise inspections led to the discovery of slips indicating escaped turnovers. The assessing officer issued notices under Section 16 and reassessed the turnovers using the best of judgment method. However, the Full Bench held that Section 16, as it stood, did not authorize the determination of escaped turnover by best of judgment. Consequently, the reassessment orders were quashed.2. Retrospective amendment of Section 16 and its implications:Following the Full Bench's decision, the government amended Section 16 with retrospective effect from April 1, 1959, through Tamil Nadu Act No. 18 of 1966. The amended Section 16 explicitly allowed the assessing officer to determine escaped turnover by best of judgment. The amendment aimed to validate earlier assessments made under the original Section 16. The retrospective operation of the amendment meant that any order made without jurisdiction under the original provision became valid under the amended provision.3. Validity of the validating provision in Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Act No. 18 of 1966:Section 3 of the amending Act validated all assessments, reassessments, levies, or collections of tax or penalty made under Section 16 before the publication of the Act, notwithstanding any judgment, decree, or order of any court. The provision aimed to deem all such actions as valid and in accordance with law. The court held that the validating provision effectively removed the basis of the earlier judicial decision by retrospectively changing the law, thus making the original assessments valid. The court distinguished between reversing a judicial decision and making it ineffective through retrospective legislation.4. Estimation of suppressed turnover and assessment of penalty:For the assessment year 1961-62, the assessing officer estimated the escaped turnover based on slips recovered during inspections, resulting in a figure of Rs. 26,37,640.30. For 1962-63, the estimate was based on discrepancies between slips and regular accounts, resulting in Rs. 41,34,821. The Tribunal reduced these estimates by 50%, considering the possibility of non-uniform suppression throughout the year. The court further reduced the estimates by half, acknowledging the inclusion of probable escaped turnover in the original assessment. The penalty levied was based on actual suppression found, not on the estimated turnover, and was upheld by the court.Conclusion:The tax revision petitions were dismissed, subject to the reduction in the estimated total turnover. The court upheld the retrospective amendment and the validating provision, confirming the validity of the reassessment orders made under the amended Section 16. The penalty levied based on actual suppression was also upheld. The petitions were dismissed with costs, and counsel's fee was set at Rs. 150 in each case.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found