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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2022 (9) TMI 932 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Court orders refund with interest to petitioners, deems appropriation illegal. The court concluded that the petitioners were entitled to a refund of the appropriated amount with interest, similar to the relief granted to Deepak Kumar ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                          Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                            Court orders refund with interest to petitioners, deems appropriation illegal.

                            The court concluded that the petitioners were entitled to a refund of the appropriated amount with interest, similar to the relief granted to Deepak Kumar Jain in a previous judgment. The court emphasized that the petitioners had no involvement in the tax liability proceedings and that the appropriation from their funds was deemed illegal and lacking jurisdiction. The competent authority was instructed to determine the refund amount promptly, ensuring fair treatment for the petitioners in line with the earlier judgment.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Legality of appropriating tax liability of Amrish Kumar Jain from funds seized from the petitioners.
                            2. Entitlement of the petitioners to a refund based on the judgment in the case of Deepak Kumar Jain.
                            3. Applicability of Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 concerning the liability of legal representatives for the tax dues of a deceased person.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Legality of Appropriating Tax Liability of Amrish Kumar Jain from Funds Seized from the Petitioners:
                            The court addressed whether the tax liability of Amrish Kumar Jain was rightly appropriated from the funds seized from the petitioners and kept in the P.D. account by the Revenue. The court noted that the firm M/s Girilal Mamchand and Company, initially constituted in 1951, was reconstituted in 1966 to include new partners, including Amrish Kumar Jain. After the death of Giri Lal Jain in 1973, and other partners by 1978, the firm effectively became a proprietorship under Amrish Kumar Jain. The court observed that the wealth tax assessments for the years 1970-71 to 1974-75 were finalized in 1986 without any notice to the legal heirs of Giri Lal Jain. The court concluded that the petitioners had no business relations or participation in the proceedings that led to the tax liability, making the appropriation from their funds illegal and without jurisdiction.

                            2. Entitlement of the Petitioners to a Refund Based on the Judgment in the Case of Deepak Kumar Jain:
                            The court referenced its previous judgment dated 11.08.2016, which had set aside the appropriation of funds from Deepak Kumar Jain, one of the sons of Giri Lal Jain, and directed a refund with interest. The court found that the petitioners were on the same footing as Deepak Kumar Jain and were entitled to the same relief. It was noted that the petitioners had no participation in the assessment proceedings and that the liability was imposed without any legal basis. The court ordered that the competent authority should consider the petitioners' claim in light of the previous judgment and determine the amount to be refunded along with interest within four weeks.

                            3. Applicability of Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
                            The court discussed the scope of Section 159, which makes legal representatives responsible for the tax liabilities of a deceased person to the extent of the estate inherited. The court clarified that the liability could not be imposed on the petitioners without showing that they inherited any estate from Giri Lal Jain. It was emphasized that no notice or opportunity was given to the legal heirs during the assessment proceedings, making the imposition of liability on the petitioners illegal. The court reiterated that the funds seized in the 2004 search had no connection with the assets of Giri Lal Jain, who had died 30 years earlier.

                            Conclusion:
                            The court concluded that the petitioners were entitled to the same relief as Deepak Kumar Jain, including the refund of the appropriated amount with interest. The competent authority was directed to determine the refund amount within four weeks, ensuring that the petitioners receive the same treatment as granted in the judgment dated 11.08.2016. The court emphasized the illegality and lack of jurisdiction in appropriating the petitioners' funds for the tax liability of Amrish Kumar Jain.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found