S. V. KANDASKAR versus V. N. DESHPANDE & ANR.

S. V. KANDASKAR versus V. N. DESHPANDE & ANR.

Assessment and reassessment proceedings for determining tax liability under Income-tax Act are not subject to the control of the winding up court under Companies Act s. 446. Income Tax Officers do not perform the functions of a court under s. 446(2); leave is not required to issue notices or conduct reassessment proceedings. The winding up court may scrutinize tax liability once determined, but cannot transfer or assume assessment proceedings.

Parties
Appellant: S. V. Kandaskar; Respondents: V. N. Deshpande & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 January 1972
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Judgment and Order Dated January 31, 1970 in Appeal No. 94 of 1967
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Winding Up of Companies, Assessment of Escaped Income, Jurisdiction of Liquidation Court Under Companies Act S. 446, Reassessment Under Income Tax Act S. 148
Income Tax Company Law Winding Up of Companies Assessment of Escaped Income Jurisdiction of Liquidation Court Under Companies Act S. 446 Reassessment Under Income Tax Act S. 148

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S. V. Kandaskar

Appellant

V. N. Deshpande & Anr.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Bombay High Court Judgment and Order Dated January 31, 1970 in Appeal No. 94 of 1967

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Income Tax Officers require leave of the liquidation Court to reopen assessment of a company for escaped income under s. 148 of Income-tax Act and s. 446(1) of Companies Act

Ratio Decidendi

Assessment and reassessment proceedings for determining tax liability under Income-tax Act are not subject to the control of the winding up court under Companies Act s. 446. Income Tax Officers do not perform the functions of a court under s. 446(2); leave is not required to issue notices or conduct reassessment proceedings. The winding up court may scrutinize tax liability once determined, but cannot transfer or assume assessment proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.