<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1956 (3) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49678</link>
    <description>Section 64 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 recognised a statutory right to local assessment, displaced only by a valid transfer of a particular pending case under section 5(7A). The transfer power required case-specific application of mind to a defined assessment year or proceeding; a general, all-purpose transfer of all assessments without temporal limit did not satisfy that standard. An omnibus order shifting the assessee&#039;s cases wholesale from Calcutta to Ranchi was treated as discriminatory and unsupported by law, contrary to Article 14. The transfer order was therefore invalid and unenforceable, and the assessee remained entitled to local assessment. One concurring judge would also have struck down the transfer provisions as ultra vires Article 14 for lack of safeguards.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2014 11:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1956 (3) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49678</link>
      <description>Section 64 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 recognised a statutory right to local assessment, displaced only by a valid transfer of a particular pending case under section 5(7A). The transfer power required case-specific application of mind to a defined assessment year or proceeding; a general, all-purpose transfer of all assessments without temporal limit did not satisfy that standard. An omnibus order shifting the assessee&#039;s cases wholesale from Calcutta to Ranchi was treated as discriminatory and unsupported by law, contrary to Article 14. The transfer order was therefore invalid and unenforceable, and the assessee remained entitled to local assessment. One concurring judge would also have struck down the transfer provisions as ultra vires Article 14 for lack of safeguards.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49678</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>