LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

BHOPAL SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD. versus THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BHOPAL

Citation: [1961] 1 S.C.R. 474 · Decided: 02-09-1960 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.K. DAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

4i4 
8UPRE:\fE COURT REPORTS 
[ 1961] 
i96o 
direction is given under s. 8(2), there is not.bing in that 
provision which prevents rectification of that ordn. 
~(;~, ~>~~ 
By sub-s. (4) of s. 8 of the ln\'cstiga.tion Act, the 
"· 
findi11gH recorded by the Commission in cases or points 
Thr Cnmmi"''"" referred t-0 theri1 are macle final in all aRsessment or 
0/ /llcowHo·., reassessment proceedings. The Act has, by sub-s. (2) of 
"1-'"".'· Jrnvau- s. 8 remored.the bar of limitation which arose by 
CO>t·Corh•• & 
2 
f I I 
T 
A 
1 
I 
• 
c00 , 1., nangalvi(' ~. 
5 o t le ncorue 
~~ ct. twas con1petcnt t- icre-
0 
... _ 
fore to the Income I ax Officer to reopen the assess. 
"""" 1. 
ment proceedings not w ithslll.nding any lapse of time 
and the prev ions order of assessment did not opPrate 
as a bar to such reassessment. 
The High Court was 
therefore in our judgment right in recording its 
answers on the three questions submitted by the Com-
missioner of Income Tax. In that view, the appPal 
fails and is dismissed with costs. 
Appeal dismissed. 
THE BHOPAL SUGAI{ INDUSTRIE8 LTD. 
v. 
THE J'.'iCOME-TAX. OFFICEH, BHOPAL 
(8. K. DAS, j\f. HIDAYATULLAH, K. c. DAS GUPTA, 
J. c. SHAil ANO N. RAJAOOPALA AYYANOAR, J.J.) 
[)irrcfion.< by superior Tribtmals-If could be refused lo be 
carried 011t-J>ri11ci'plrs (if adn1inistrafion of justice. 
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the exercise of its 
appellate jurisdiction gave certain directions to the respo1•dent. 
an Income-tax Officer, in connection \\'ith the ascertainment of 
the market value of sugarcane grown by the appellant at their 
farm and use<l by them for the manufacture of sugar. Th~ appel-
lant asked the Income-tax Officer to give effect to the said order 
and directions of the Tribunal but was informed that no relief 
coul<l be given. Thus the Income-tax Officer failed to carry out 
the directions of the Tribunal. 
Held, that the refusal to carry out the directions which a 
superior Tribunal had given in exercise of its appellate powers 
was in effect a denial of justice and was furthermore destructive 
1 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
475 
of one of the basic principles in the administration of justice 
r960 
based as it is in this country on a hierarchy of courts ; and the 
result of such refusal would lead to chaos in the administration The Bhopal Sugar 
of justice. 
Indil<stries Ltd. 
CIVIL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal The 1n:~me-tax 
No. 407 of 1956. 
Officer. Bhopal 
Appeal from the judgment and order dated Febru-
ary 14, 1956, of the former Judicial Commissioner's 
Court, Bhopal, in Misc. Civil Case No. 24'of 1955. 
Sanat P. Mehta and S. N. Andley, for the appellant. 
K. N. Rajagopa.l Sastri and D. Gupta, for the 
respondent. 
1960. September 2. 
The Judgment of the Court 
was delivered by 
. S. K. DAS J.-This is an appeal on a certificate 
s. K. Das J. 
under Art. 133 of the Constitution. The short ques-
tion for decision is. whether the learned Judicial Com-
missioner of Bhopal rightly dismissed a petition under 
Art. 226 of the Constitution made by the Bhopal 
Sugar Industries, Limited, hereinafter refered to as 
the appellant company, praying for the issue of an 
appropriate order or direction in the nature of a writ 
of mandamus to compel the Income-tax Officer, 
Bhopal, respondent herein, to carry out certain direc-
tions given by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 
Bombay, to the said officer in an appeal preferred by 
the appellant company from an order of assessment 
ma.de against it by the respondent. 
The relevant facts are these. The appellant com-
pany -carries on the business of manufacturing and 
selling sugar in various grades and quantities. It has 
its factory at Sehore which was formerly in the 
Bhopal State and is now situate in the State of 
Madhya Pradesh. It purchased sugar-cane from local 
cultivators and also grew its own sugar-cane in farms 
situate in that State, such sugar-cane being used for 
its manufacture of sugar. During the year of account 
ending on Sept9mber 30, 1950, the appellant company 
purchased 7, 72,217 ma.unds of sugar-cane from local 
61 
47G 
Sl:PRE:IIE COVRT REPORTS 
[1961] 
'9"° 
cu!Livators at various purchasing c•,ntrcs, 14 in num-
TI 
RI·-·-, 0 
ber, situate at a distance of about 8 t-0 22 miles from 
oe 
oopa ·'" ga1 . 
r 
Th 
. 
"d 
, 
1,,d"'"'" Ltd. its 1actory. 
e price pat was Rs. 1-4·6 per maund, 
'" 
that being the price fixed by the then Sta.to of Bhopal. 
Thr Inco•nr-ta• The average co

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.