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 the Income-tax Officer could validly invoke section 35(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 to rectify the assessment and redetermine the petitioner's share income after the firm's status as a registered firm had been upheld, and whether the impugned rectification was without jurisdiction.
Analysis: The reassessment arose only after the High Court and the Tribunal had directed that the firm be treated as a registered firm, and the rectification was undertaken when section 35(5) was already in force. The petitioner had himself pursued the claim that the firm should be assessed as a registered firm, and having obtained that position, could not contend that the consequential rectification could not be made under the statute then in force. The challenge that no fresh assessment order had been made on the registered firm was not supported by the affidavit and was raised for the first time at the hearing. In the absence of material to rebut the normal presumption that official acts are regularly and lawfully performed, the Court declined to accept that objection.
Conclusion: The rectification under section 35(5) was held to be valid and within jurisdiction, and the challenge to the assessment failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a later statutory rectification is undertaken pursuant to a judicial determination altering the status of the assessee, the assessee cannot resist the rectification by relying on the earlier position or by disputing regularity of official acts without material evidence.