Case Law Details
Brief of the Case
Bombay High court held In the case of R.B. Shreeram Durgaprasad (P) Ltd. vs. The CIT that concept of double taxation is not attracted in the present matter. The Export firm has to pay tax as it has actually utilized that amount as its income while the assessee has to pay tax as it attempted to conceal that income. The income really belongs to the assessee and he is answerable to pay tax upon it even if the same taxed in the account of export firm.
Facts of the Case
The assessee and the other assessee (Export firm – not party) were two units which belong to a group of companies commonly known as Durgaprasad and More group of companies. Both assessee’s deal in export of manganese. Search and seizure proceedings were conducted on both the parties and found that real profit were not entered in books of accounts. The assessments were then completed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. ITAT has confirmed additions during the A.y. 1950-51 to 1958-59 on export firm. The Assessee disputed that in light of above additions in past, current addition of Rs. 1.71 crores is not correct and it will amount to double taxation.
Contention of the Assessee
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
There is a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka vs Ayyanahalli Bakkappa &Sons (1988)71 STC 202 where the same turnover of sales were already assessed in the hands of three depots which were not registered as dealers, the Department cannot pass a reassessment order against the Respondent in respect of the same turnover, since two assessments on the same turnover is not permissible.