1971 (7) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been brought by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, and another. The respondent is one K. S. Rashid. He is ex-parte. The said K. S. Rashid is one of the partners in a Arm, M/s. K. S. Rashid & Sons. He held one-third share in that firm. For the assessment year 1947-1948, the relevant accounting year being 1946-1947, he was assessed on November 15,1949. The Income-tax Officer came to the con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d at Rs. 2,08,277. On February 28, 1956, the Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Meerut, passed an order under section 35(5) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, holding that for the year 1947-48 the petitioner was liable to pay tax upon a net income of Rs. 2,08,277. A further order was made but there is no need to refer to that order because that order either stands or falls with the assessment order made....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act, 1953, is not declaratory of the pre-existing law, nor a matter relating to procedure, but affects vested rights, and must be deemed to have come into force only from 1st April, 1952. It has no greater retrospective effect than has been expressly granted to it and the power conferred by the said clause to rectify the assessment of a partner of a firm by including or correcting the share of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t held, following the decision of Habibullah's case, and extending the ratio of the decision that the revenue had no competence to carry out the rectification in question. The correctness of the decision in Habibillah's case, as well as in Atmala Nagaraj's case, came up for consideration before five judges Bench of this court in Income-tax Officer, Tuticorin v. T. S. Devinatha Nadar This court ....