Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)Section 66 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
T.P. Hariram Sait By Guardians Parvathi ... vs The Commr. Of Income-Tax, Madras on 18 April, 1955
10. What the position would have been had Subbarayulu Chettiar himself filed "a return, which either concealed his true income from the assessing authorities, or which contained inaccurate particulars of income deliberately furnished by him, does not arise for consideration. Whether in such circumstances the principle laid down by us in Hariram Sait v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, (A) could be extended does not arise for consideration either. It is not therefore necessary for us to determine in these proceedings the limits of the principle laid down in (A), except to observe that in that case the assessee, Hariram Sait, on whom penalty was levied, was assessed not in the status of a Hindu undivided family but in his individual status. We had occasion to explain in our unreported Judgment in W. P. Nos. 743 and 748 of 1955 (Mad) (B), the real nature of the Hindu undivided family as a juristic entity for purposes of assessment under the Income-tax Act. We pointed out that a change in kartaship by death or otherwise did not affect the legal continuity of that juristic entity.
Section 22 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
1