w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Commissioner Of Income-Tax v/s Society Hosiery Factory


Company & Directors' Information:- J G HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101TZ2001PTC009707

Company & Directors' Information:- K D S HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101PB2001FTC024327

Company & Directors' Information:- R M H HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17125DL2007PTC167271

Company & Directors' Information:- P T M HOSIERY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U52322WB1994PTC062394

Company & Directors' Information:- M G HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17124TZ2002PTC010195

Company & Directors' Information:- D D HOSIERY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U18101WB1973PTC028694

Company & Directors' Information:- M. B. HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101WB2008PTC125110

Company & Directors' Information:- R R HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101MH1984PTC034394

Company & Directors' Information:- K K HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18204MH2014PTC251777

Company & Directors' Information:- B B HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999MH2015PTC267158

Company & Directors' Information:- M C S HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311WB2001PTC093781

Company & Directors' Information:- S P HOSIERY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51311PB1985PTC006113

Company & Directors' Information:- D A V HOSIERY FACTORY LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U17115WB1949PLC017775

    Decided On, 21 November 1988

    At, High Court of Punjab and Haryana

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOKAL CHAND MITAL & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SODHI

    For the Appearing Parties: Ajay Mittal, Ashok Bhan, Advocates.



Judgment Text

(1.) THE question of law referred for the opinion of this court is as under :

"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was not legally competent to pass the penalty order after April 1, 1976 ?"

(2.) THE matter raised here is covered by the reasoning as set forth in the judgment of this court in CIT v. Mela Ram Jagdish Raj and Co. [1981] 132 ITR 897, which was later affirmed by the Full Bench of this court in CIT v. Mohinder Lal [1987] 168 ITR 101. Following these judgments, the reference is answered in the negative, in favour of

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

the Revenue and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.
O R