Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 30 (0.27 seconds)Section 11 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 197 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 12 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
M.P. Peria Karuppan Chettiar vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Wealth Tax, ... on 19 November, 1974
42. After going through the entire material and all the documents on record, we are of the view that the assessee had placed full facts and entire relevant material, including the documents before the Income Tax Department in the assessment year 1973 and onwards and no new material came to the light of the departmental authorities, demanding or justifying initiation of re-assessment proceedings. A perusal of the order of the Assessing Officer makes it very clear that what was constructed or re-constructed, interpreted or re-interpreted considered or re-considered by him, was the only one document, i.e., the Will dated 22-11-1970. The Assessing Officer did not take pains even to point out any fact or circumstances which was inconsistent or contradictory to the stand of the assessee. Even about the user of the dedicated property or utilisation of its income otherwise than in compliance to the deed of Will could not be found and pointed out by the departmental authorities. So far as the reference to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M.P. Pariakaruppan Chettiar (supra) is concerned, in that case the issue related to the construction of gift deeds and use of certain words in the gift deeds was considered to ascertain as to whether the gift was to the sons absolutely or not. In any case, the ratio of that decision cannot provide any justification for reopening the case.
C. N. Arunachala Mudaliar vs C. A. Muruganatha Mudaliar And Another on 14 October, 1953
In support of his conclusion, the Assessing Officer has also made reference to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M.P. Periakaruppan Chettiar v. CIT [1975] 99 ITR 1 and ratio in the case of C.N. Arunachallamudehar v. Camuruganatha [1955] SCR 243, according to which, the intention of donor is to be connected from language of the document taken along with the surrounding circumstances, in accordance with the well known canons of constitution. After referring to this ratio, the Assessing Officer has proceeded to observe that in the instant case, the construction of Will is clear, in so far as intention of the testator is concerned and language of the document does not suggest that the property was bequeathed in favour of the trust. He, thereafter, held that the property bequeathed through Will if the property of the deities and chargeable to tax in the status of artificial juridical person.