{"id":125152,"date":"1970-04-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1970-04-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970"},"modified":"2015-11-28T17:59:56","modified_gmt":"2015-11-28T12:29:56","slug":"commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1588, \t\t  1971 SCR  (1) 418<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S C.<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Shah, J.C.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, U.P.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nJ.   P. KANODIA &amp; CO.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n28\/04\/1970\n\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nHEGDE, K.S.\nGROVER, A.N.\n\nCITATION:\n 1970 AIR 1588\t\t  1971 SCR  (1) 418\n 1970 SCC  (2)\t 7\n\n\nACT:\nIncome-tax  Act\t (11 of 1922), ss. 25(5)  and  24-Registered\nfirm--Partners\tand minors entitled to benefits of  partnei-\nship--Respective   shares  in  profits--Directions   to\t  be\nassessed  as  the  income  of  their  respective   families-\nvalidity.\nLoss  in  speculative transactions-Set off  against  profits\nfrom other business anctivities-if permissible.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  respondent is a registered firm of two partners.  Three\nminors\twere  admitted to the benefits of  the\tpartnership.\nFor  the  assessment year 1957-58,  the\t Income-tax  Officer\nrejected the claim of the firm to set off under s. 24(1) the\nloss  from certain speculative transactions against  profits\nfrom  other  business  and  held  that\tsince  the   capital\ncontributed  by\t the  partners and minors  was\tout  of\t the\ncapital\t of  their respective Hindu  undivided\tfamilies  to\nwhich they belonged, the profits allocate( to them should be\nassessed  as the income of their respective  families.\t The\norder  was  confirmed by the Commissioner.   In\t a  petition\nunder  Art. 226, the High Court set aside the  direction  to\nassess\tthe  shares  of the partners  and  minors  to  their\nrespective   families,\tand,  following\t the   decision\t  in\nJagannath  Mahadeo Prasad v. Commissioner of Income-tax,  55\nI.T.R 501 held that the speculation losses were liable to be\nset off against the profits in other business in the year of\nassessment.\nin appeal to this Court,\nHELD: (1) Once the Income-tax Officer grants registration of\na  firm\t he  cannot proceed to inquire\twhet-her  the  share\nallocated  to a partner is beneficially held by\t some  other\nperson\tor entity that is, whether the partners\t represented\nother  persons.\t He must allocate the profits in  accordance\nwith  deed  of\tpartnership.  Therefore, the  order  of\t the\nIncome-tax Officer, in the present case, directing that\t the\nincome\tof the partners and minors shall be assessed in\t the\nhands of their respective families was withOut jurisdiction.\n[420 F-H]\n(2) The decision relied upon by the High Court was  reversed\nby  this  Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1421533\/\">Commissioner of Income-tax  v.  Jagannath\nMahadeo\t Prasad,<\/a>  71 I.T.R. 296 (S.C.), and  therefore,\t the\nassessee  was  not entitled to set  off\t speculation  losses\nagainst profits from other business activities, [321 A-B]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 193 of 1967.<br \/>\nAppeal\tfrom the judgment and order dated March 29, 1965  of<br \/>\nthe Allahabad High Court in S.A. No. 972 of 1964.<br \/>\njagadish  Swarup, Solicitor-General, G. C. Sharma and B.  D.<br \/>\nSharma, for the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>M.   V. Goswami, for the respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">419<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n Shah, J. M\/s J. P. Kanodia and Company is a firm registered<br \/>\nunder the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.\tThe partners of\t the<br \/>\nfirm were Smt.\tShanti Devi and Badri Prasad.  Three minors-<br \/>\nPradeep\t Kumar,\t Anand\tPrakash\t and  Rajendra\tPrasad\twere<br \/>\nadmitted to the benefits of the partnership.<br \/>\nIn proceedings for assessment of tax for the assessment year<br \/>\n1957-58,  the Income-tax Officer rejected the claim  of\t the<br \/>\nfirm  to set off loss from certain speculative\ttransactions<br \/>\naggregating to, Rs. 22,234\/- and computed the income of\t the<br \/>\nfirm  at  Rs. 26,365\/-.\t The Income-tax Officer was  of\t the<br \/>\nopinion\t that since the capital contributed by the  partners<br \/>\nand  the  minors who were admitted to the  benefits  of\t the<br \/>\npartnership  was out of the capital of the respective  Hindu<br \/>\nUndivided  Families  to\t which they  belonged,\tthe  profits<br \/>\nallocated  to the partners and to the minors were liable  to<br \/>\nbe  assessed in the hands of the respective Hindu  Undivided<br \/>\nFamilies to which they belonged.\n<\/p>\n<p>The order passed by the Income-tax Officer was confirmed  in<br \/>\na  revision application by the Commissioner.  The firm\tthen<br \/>\nmoved  a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution  before<br \/>\nthe High Court of Allahabad.  Two contentions were raised in<br \/>\nsupport\t of the petition : (i) that the\t Income-tax  Officer<br \/>\nerred in directing that the profits allocated to the  shares<br \/>\nof the partners and to the minors be assessed as the  income<br \/>\nof  the\t respective Hindu Undivided Families to\t which\tthey<br \/>\nbelonged;  and\t(ii) that the loss in  speculation  business<br \/>\nshould\thave been Set Off under S. 24(1) of  the  Income-tax<br \/>\nAct against profits from other business.<br \/>\nManchanda, J., accepted the first contention, observing that<br \/>\nthe  order directing assessment of the shares  allocated  to<br \/>\nthe partners and the minors to the benefits of the  partners<br \/>\n&#8220;was manifestly without jurisdiction&#8221;, he quashed that\tpart<br \/>\nof  the order of the Income-tax Officer.  The learned  Judge<br \/>\nrejected  the second contention for in his view\t the  matter<br \/>\nwas  covered by the judgment in Jagannath Mahadeo Prasad  v.<br \/>\nThe Commissioner of Income-tax(1).  He accordingly held that<br \/>\nthe speculation losses were liable to be set off against the<br \/>\nprofits\t in other business in the year of  assessment.\t The<br \/>\norder of Manchanda, J., was confirmed in a special appeal by<br \/>\nthe Division Bench of the High Court.  This appeal is  filed<br \/>\nby  the\t Commissioner with certificate granted by  the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>(1)  55 I.T.R. 501.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">420<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Sub-sections  (5) and (6) of s. 23 of the Income-tax Act  as<br \/>\nthey were in force in the year of assessment read as follows<br \/>\n\t      &#8220;(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the<br \/>\n\t      foregoing sub-sections, when the assessee is a<br \/>\n\t      firm and the total income of the firm has been<br \/>\n\t      assessed\tunder sub-section  (1),\t sub-section<br \/>\n\t      (3) or sub-section (4) as the case may be,\n<\/p>\n<p>\t      (i)   the\t income-tax  payable  by  the\tfirm<br \/>\n\t      itself shall be determined :\n<\/p>\n<p>\t      (ii)  the total income of each partner of\t the<br \/>\n\t      firm,  including\ttherein\t his  share  of\t its<br \/>\n\t      income,  profits\tand gains  of  the  previous<br \/>\n\t      year,  shall be assessed and the sums  payable<br \/>\n\t      by  him on the basis of such assessment  shall<br \/>\n\t      be determined.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t. .    .     .\t    .\t  .    .&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t      &#8220;(6)  Whenever the Income-tax Officer makes  a<br \/>\n\t      determination    in   accordance\t with\t the<br \/>\n\t      provisions of sub-section (5), he shall notify<br \/>\n\t      to the firm by an order in writing the  amount<br \/>\n\t      of the total income on which the determination<br \/>\n\t      has  been based and the apportionment  thereof<br \/>\n\t      between the several partners.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>In the case of a registered firm the Income-tax Officer\t has<br \/>\nto determine the income-tax payable by the firm and also  to<br \/>\ndetermine  the total income of each partner of the firm\t and<br \/>\nthe sum payable by him on the basis of such assessment.\t  He<br \/>\nhas  then  to certify the determination in  accordance\twith<br \/>\nsub-s. (6) and the apportionment thereof among the partners.<br \/>\nOnce the Income-tax Officer has granted registration of\t the<br \/>\nfirm,  be  cannot  proceed  to\tinquire\t whether  the  share<br \/>\nallocated  to a partner is beneficially held by\t some  other<br \/>\nperson or entity.  The Income-tax Officer must allocate\t the<br \/>\nprofits\t  in  accordance  with\tthe  deed   of\t partnership<br \/>\nregistered  by\thim  and  to the  persons  admitted  to\t the<br \/>\nbenefits  thereof according to their respective shares.\t  He<br \/>\ncannot\tat that stage hold an inquiry whether  the  partners<br \/>\nrepresented  other  persons.  The order\t of  the  Income-tax<br \/>\nOfficer\t directing that the income of the partners  and\t the<br \/>\nshares\tallocated to the minors admitted to the benefit\t &#8216;of<br \/>\nthe  partnership  shall\t be assessed in\t the  hands  of\t the<br \/>\nrespective  Hindu  Undivided Families  was  plainly  without<br \/>\njurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>On  tile second contention not much need be said.  The\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt purported to follow the judgment in Jagannath Mahadeo<br \/>\n4 2 1<br \/>\nPrasd&#8217;s\t case(1),  but\tthat  judgment\thas  been  expressly<br \/>\noverruled by this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1421533\/\">Commissioner of Income-tax,\tU.P.<br \/>\nv. Jagannath Mahadeo Prasad<\/a>(-).\t This Court held disagreeing<br \/>\nwith  Jagannath\t Mahadeo  Prasad&#8217;s  case  (2)  that  in\t the<br \/>\ncomputation of the income, profits and gains of the year  of<br \/>\nassessment  under s. 1O ( 1 ) of the Indian Income-tax\tAct,<br \/>\nthe  assessee is not entitled to set off speculative  losses<br \/>\nagainst\t profits from other business activities of the\tsame<br \/>\nyear.\n<\/p>\n<p>The  appeal  is partially allowed.  The order  of  the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Income-<br \/>\ntax  refusing  to  allow the set  off  of  speculation\tloss<br \/>\nagainst profits from ready business is set aside.  The order<br \/>\nof  the\t High  Court vacating the direction  to\t assess\t the<br \/>\nshares allocated to the partners and persons admitted to the<br \/>\nbenefits  of the partnership in the profits of the  assessee<br \/>\nfirm  to  the respective Hindu Undivided Families  to  which<br \/>\nthey  belonged is confirmed.  There will be no order  as  to<br \/>\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n<pre>V.   P.\t  S.\t\t\t\t\t      Appeal\npartly allowed.\n(1)  55 I.T.R. 501.\n(2)  71 I.T.R. 296\nLI 2Sup.CI\/70 -13.\n4 2 2\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970 Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1588, 1971 SCR (1) 418 Author: S C. Bench: Shah, J.C. PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, U.P. Vs. RESPONDENT: J. P. KANODIA &amp; CO. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/04\/1970 BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BENCH: SHAH, J.C. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-125152","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1970-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-28T12:29:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970\",\"datePublished\":\"1970-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-28T12:29:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970\"},\"wordCount\":1007,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970\",\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1970-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-28T12:29:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1970-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-28T12:29:56+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970","datePublished":"1970-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-28T12:29:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970"},"wordCount":1007,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970","name":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1970-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-28T12:29:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-u-p-vs-j-p-kanodia-co-on-28-april-1970#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs J. P. Kanodia &amp; Co on 28 April, 1970"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125152","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=125152"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125152\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125152"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125152"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125152"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}