Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for the purposes of section 34(1)(b) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, excessive rebate of super-tax granted under the Finance Act, 1956 could amount to income being assessed at too low a rate, and whether reassessment could be initiated on that footing.
Analysis: The expression "assessed at too low a rate" was held to denote not merely the wrong fraction applied to taxable income, but also a prescribed standard or measure by which tax liability is computed. The scheme of the Finance Act, 1956 showed that super-tax and rebate were both integral parts of the tax measure, and reduction of rebate under the provisos affected the effective rate at which tax was charged. On that construction, an assessee who received rebate without the required reduction could be said to have been assessed at too low a rate. At the same time, the record was insufficient to record a final answer on the validity of the notice and the precise basis on which reassessment proceedings were initiated, since the notice itself was not before the Court.
Conclusion: Excessive rebate could fall within the expression "assessed at too low a rate" under section 34(1)(b), but the matter had to be remanded for the High Court to examine the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings on the notice issued.
Ratio Decidendi: Where tax liability is computed by a statutory measure that includes rebate and its reduction, an excessive rebate may constitute assessment at too low a rate for the purpose of reassessment jurisdiction under section 34(1)(b).