{"id":221890,"date":"1967-05-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1967-04-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967"},"modified":"2018-05-15T02:10:56","modified_gmt":"2018-05-14T20:40:56","slug":"kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967","title":{"rendered":"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West … on 1 May, 1967"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West … on 1 May, 1967<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1968 AIR 162, \t\t 1967 SCR (3) 833<\/div>\n
Author: S Sikri<\/div>\n
Bench: Sikri, S.M.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nKALAWATI DEVI HARLALKA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL & ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n01\/05\/1967\n\nBENCH:\nSIKRI, S.M.\nBENCH:\nSIKRI, S.M.\nSHAH, J.C.\nRAMASWAMI, V.\n\nCITATION:\n 1968 AIR  162\t\t  1967 SCR  (3) 833\n CITATOR INFO :\n F\t    1968 SC 816\t (3)\n RF\t    1969 SC 408\t (4)\n RF\t    1969 SC 701\t (5)\n F\t    1977 SC 459\t (3)\n RF\t    1988 SC 752\t (6)\n\n\nACT:\nIncome-tax  Act, 1961, ss. 297 and 298-Commissioner  issuing\nnotice of revision of assessment under s. 33B of the income-\ntax  Act, 1922 - whether such ' proceedings covered  by\t the\nexpression   \"\tproceedings  for  the  assessment\"   in\t  s.\n297(2)(a)-S. 6 General Clauses Act, 1897-Effect of s.  298\nand  the Income-tax (Removal of Difficulties) Orders,  1962-\nValidity of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe appellant received a notice on January 24, 1963 from the\nCommissioner  of  Income-tax,  West  Bengal,  initiating   a\nrevision  under s. 33B of the Income-tax Act, 1922,  of\t her\nassessments for the years 1952-53 to 1960-61.  The appellant\nthereupon filed a petition in the High Court tinder Art. 226\nof  the Constitution praying that the notice be quashed\t and\nthe  respondent\t restrained  from giving effect\t to  it.   A\nsingle Bench of the High Court dismissed the petition and in\nappeal to a Division Bench was also dismissed.\nit  was\t contended on behalf of the appellant (i)  that\t the\nIncome-tax  Act,  1922, having been repealed by the  Act  of\n1961  which came into force on April 1, 1962 the  respondent\nhad  no\t power, authority or jurisdiction  to  initiate\t the\nproceedings under s. 33B of the 1922 Act; (ii) that s. 6  of\nthe General Clauses Act, 1897, did not authorise the initia-\ntion  of the proceedings inasmuch as no steps were taken  in\nrespect thereof while the 1922 Act was in force; (iii)\tthat\ns.  298\t of  the 1961 Act was void; and in  any\t event,\t the\npowers\tunder  the  section..  under  which  the  Government\npromulgated  the Income-tax (Removal of Difficulties)  Order\n1962,  clause 4 of which purported to cover a case like\t the\npresent one, can be exercised only in respect of the matters\ndealt  with in s. 297 of that Act which does not  deal\twith\nproceedings tinder s. 33B of the 1922 Act.\nHELD : (i) The proceedings initiated by the respondent\twere\nvalid  as they were covered by the expression \"\t proceedings\nfor  the  .assessment of that person\" in Clause\t (a)  of  s.\n297(2) of the 1961 Act. [841E; 846B]\nThe word \"assessment\" can bear a very comprehensive meaning;\nit  can comprehend the whole procedure for ascertaining\t and\nimposing liability upon the tax-payer.\tThere was nothing in\nthe  context  of  s.  297  which  required  the\t  expression\n\"procedure  for\t the  assessment\" to  be  given\t a  narrower\nmeaning.  S. 297 is meant to provide as far as possible\t for\nall  contingencies which may arise out of the repeal of\t the\n1922 Act. [845A-C]\nCommissioner  of Income-tax, Bombay v. Khemchand  Ramdas,<\/a>  6\nI.T.R.\t414 at p. 423; A. N. Lakshman Shenoy  v.  Income-tax\nOfficer,  Ernakulum, 34 I.T.R. 275 at p. 291; C. A.  Abraham\nv.  Income-tax officer, Kottayam, 41 I.T.R. 425 at pp.\t429-\n430; Commissioner of Incometax v. Bhikaji Dadabhai & Co., 42\nI.T.R. 123 at p. 127; Commissioner of Income-tax v.  Patiala\nCement Co. Ltd.,<\/a> 32 I.T.R. 333; Bhailal Amin & Scns Ltd.  v.\nR. P. Dalal, 24 I.T.R. 229, referred to.\n8 3 4\n(ii)S. 6 of the General Clauses Act would not apply because\ns.  297(2)  evidences  an  intention  to  the  contrary\t  by\nproviding  for many matters, some in accord with what  Would\nhave been the result under s. 6 and some contrary to such  a\nresult. [846A]\nUnion of lndia\tV. Madan Gopal Kabra, 25 I.T.R. 58, referred\nto.\n(iii)Section  298  of  the 1961 Act is\tvalid  and  the\npresent case was covered by cl. 4 of the Income-tax (Removal\nof Difficulties) Order, 1962.[846 C-D]\nJalan  Trading\tCompany\t (Priveite)  Ltd.  v.  Mill  Mazdoor<\/a>\njunior, [1966] 11 L.L.J. 546; Commissioner of Income-tax  v.\nDewan  Bahadur\tRamgopal  Mills,<\/a> 41 I.T.R.  280\t and  Pandit\nBanarsi Das Bhanot v. State of Madhya Pradesh,<\/a> 9 S.T.C. 388,\nreferred to.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal  No.  1421  of
\n1966.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal from the judgment and order dated December 8, 1964 of
\nthe  Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Original  Order\t No.
\n281 of 1963.\n<\/p>\n
Debi  Pal,  R. K. Chaudhuri and B. P.  Maheshwari,  for\t the
\nappellant and the Intervener. ,
\nD.Narsaraju  and R. N. Sachthey, for respondents Nos.\tI
\nand 2.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nSikri,\tJ. On January 24, 1963, the Commissioner of  Income-
\ntax,  West  Bengal,  sent  the\tfollowing  notice  to\tSmt.
\nKalawati Harlalka, appellant before us, hereinafter referred
\nto as the assessee
\n\t      “Sub  : Income-tax assessments of\t 1952-53  to
\n\t      1960-61.\t    Assessments\t   erroneous\t and
\n\t      prejudicial  to  the  interests  of   revenue-
\n\t      Revision\tof assessments under Section 33B  of
\n\t      the  Indian Income-tax Act 1922 proposal\tfor-
\n\t      Notice regarding.\n<\/p>\n
\t      On  calling for and examining the\t records  of
\n\t      your  case for the assessment  years  1952-53,
\n\t      1953-54,\t1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57,  1957-58,
\n\t      1958-59,\t 1959-60  and  1960-61\t and   other
\n\t      connected records, I consider that the  orders
\n\t      of assessment passed by the Income-tax Officer
\n\t      ‘D’  Ward, Howrah, on 7th February, 1961,\t are
\n\t      erroneous in so far as they are prejudicial to
\n\t      the  interests  of revenue for  the  following
\n\t      reasons amongst others.\n<\/p>\n
\t      2.Enquiries  made\t have revealed\tthat  no
\n\t      business\tas alleged was carried on  from\t the
\n\t      address  declared\t in the returns.   Also\t the
\n\t      said  Income-tax Officer was not justified  in
\n\t      accepting the initial capital, the acquisition
\n\t      and
\n\t      835<\/span>
\n\t      sale  of jewellery, the income from  business,
\n\t      gift  made by you etc. without any enquiry  or
\n\t      evidence whatsoever.\n<\/p>\n
\t      3.1,  therefore,\tpropose\t to  pass   such
\n\t      orders  thereon  as the circumstances  of\t the
\n\t      cases justify after giving you an\t opportunity
\n\t      of  being heard under the powers vested in  me
\n\t      under Section 33B of the Income-tax Act, 1922.
\n\t      The  cases  will be heard at 11  a.m.  on\t 1st
\n\t      February, 1963 at my above office when you are
\n\t      requested to produce the necessary evidence in
\n\t      support  of your contentions.   Objections  in
\n\t      writing accompanied by necessary evidence,  if
\n\t      any, received on or before the appointment for
\n\t      personal hearing will also be duly considered.
\n\t      Please note that no adjournment of the hearing
\n\t      will be granted.”\n<\/p>\n
The   assessee\ton  February  1,  1963,\t protested  to\t the
\nCommissioner against the issue of the notice and stated that
\nthe said notice was absolutely bad in law, illegal and void.
\nOn  the\t same date the assessee filed an  application  under
\nArt. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court at  Calcutta,
\ninter  alia praying that the said notice, dated January\t 24,
\n1963,  be  quashed  or set aside  and  the  Commissioner  of
\nIncome-tax  be\trestrained from giving effect  to  the\tsaid
\nnotice.\t  The petition was beard by Banerjee, J., and  three
\npoints were urged before him:\n<\/p>\n
(1)That\t the Income-tax Act, 1922-hereinafter referred\tto
\nas the 1922 Act-having been repealed by Income-tax Act, 1961\n<\/p>\n
-hereinafter  referred\tto as the 1961 Act-which  came\tinto
\nforce  on April 1, 1962, the Commissioner of Income-tax\t had
\nno   power,  authority\tor  jurisdiction  to  initiate\t the
\nproceedings under s. 33B of the 1922 Act;
\n(2)Section  6 of the General Clauses Act in no way  autho-
\nrises the initiation of the said proceedings inasmuch as  no
\nsteps were taken in respect thereof when the 1922 Act was in
\nforce and\/or prior to its repeal; and
\n(3)The\tpowers\tunder s. 298 of the 1961 Act can  only\tbe
\nexercised in respect of the matters dealt with by s. 297  of
\nthe 1961 Act which does not deal with proceedings tinder  s.
\n33B of the 1922 Act.\n<\/p>\n
In  order to appreciate the grounds and the findings of\t the
\nlearned\t Judge,\t it  is necessary to set  out  the  relevant
\nstatutory provisions.\n<\/p>\n
\t      “S. 33B (1922 Act).  Power of Commissioner  to
\n\t      revise  Income-tax Officer’s  orders.-(1)\t The
\n\t      Commissioner  may\t call for  and\texamine\t the
\n\t      record of any
\n\t      83 6
\n\t      proceeding under this Act and if he  considers
\n\t      that  any order passed therein by the  Income-
\n\t      tax  Officer is erroneous in so far as  it  is
\n\t      prejudicial  to the interests of the  revenue,
\n\t      he may, after giving the assessee an  opportu-
\n\t      nity  of\tbeing  heard  and  after  making  or
\n\t      causing  to be made such enquiry as  he  deems
\n\t      necessary,  pass\tsuch order  thereon  as\t the
\n\t      circumstances  of the case justify,  including
\n\t      an  order enhancing or modifying\tthe  assess-
\n\t      ment,   or  cancelling  the   assessment\t and
\n\t      directing a fresh assessment.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (2)   No order shall be made under sub-section
\n\t      (1)<\/span>\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (a)   to revise an order of re-assessment made
\n\t      under
\n\t      the provisions of section 34; or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (b)after\tthe expiry of two years from  the
\n\t      date    of    the\t  order\t  sought    to\t  be
\n\t      revised……….\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      “S. 297. (1961 Act).  Repeals and\t savings.(1)
\n\t      The  Indian  Income-tax  Act 11  of  1922,  is
\n\t      hereby repealed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (2)Notwithstanding  the repeal of\t the  Indian
\n\t      Income-tax   Act,\t 11  of\t 1922\t(hereinafter
\n\t      referred to as the repealed Act),-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (a)where a return of income has been  filed
\n\t      before  the  commencement of this Act  by\t any
\n\t      person  for any assessment  year,\t proceedings
\n\t      for  the\tassessment of that person  for\tthat
\n\t      year may be taken and continued as if this Act
\n\t      had not been passed;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (b)where a return of income is filed after the
\n\t      commencement  of\tthis Act otherwise  than  in
\n\t      pursuance of a notice under section 34 of\t the
\n\t      repealed Act by any person for the  assessment
\n\t      year ending on the 31st day of March, 1962, or
\n\t      any  earlier  year,  the\tassessment  of\tthat
\n\t      person   for  that  year\tshall  be  made\t  in
\n\t      accordance  with\tthe procedure  specified  in
\n\t      this Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (c)any proceeding pending on the\tcommencement
\n\t      of  this Act before any income-tax  authority,
\n\t      the appellate tribunal or any court, by way of
\n\t      appeal,\treference  or  revision\t  shall\t  be
\n\t      continued\t and disposed of as if this Act\t had
\n\t      not been passed;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (d)where\tin  respect of any  assessment\tyear
\n\t      after  the  year\tending on the  31st  day  of
\n\t      March, 1940,-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)a  notice under section 34 of the  repealed
\n\t      Act had been issued before the commencement of
\n\t      this Act,
\n\t      the  proceedings in pursuance of\tsuch  notice
\n\t      may  be continued and disposed of as  if\tthis
\n\t      Act had not been passed;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      ii)  any income chargeable to tax had  escaped
\n\t      assessment   within   the\t meaning   of\tthat
\n\t      expression  in section 147 and no\t proceedings
\n\t      under  section  34  of  the  repealed  Act  in
\n\t      respect of any such income are pending at\t the
\n\t      commencement  of\tthis  Act,  a  notice  under
\n\t      section  148  may, subject to  the  provisions
\n\t      contained\t in section 149, or section 150,  be
\n\t      issued  with respect to that  assessment\tyear
\n\t      and all the provisions of this Act shall apply
\n\t      accordingly;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (e)section  23A of the repealed  Act  shall
\n\t      continue
\n\t      to haveeffect    in   relation   to    the
\n\t      assessment of any com-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      pany orits shareholders for the assessment
\n\t      year ending
\n\t      on the 31st day of March, 1962, or any earlier
\n\t      year,  and the provisions of the repealed\t Act
\n\t      shall apply to all matters arising out of such
\n\t      assessment as fully and effectually as if this
\n\t      Act had not been passed;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (f)any  proceeding for the imposition of\ta
\n\t      penalty in respect of any assessment completed
\n\t      before  the  1st day of April,  1962,  may  be
\n\t      initiated and any such penalty may be  imposed
\n\t      as if this Act had not been passed;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (g)any  proceeding for the imposition of\ta
\n\t      penalty  in respect of any assessment for\t the
\n\t      year ending on the 31st day of March, 1962, or
\n\t      any  earlier  year, which is completed  on  or
\n\t      after  the  1st  day of April,  1962,  may  be
\n\t      initiated and any such penalty may be  imposed
\n\t      under this Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (h)any election or declaration made or  option
\n\t      exercised\t by an assessee under any  provision
\n\t      of  the repealed Act and in force\t immediately
\n\t      before  the commencement of this Act shall  be
\n\t      deemed to have been an election or declaration
\n\t      made    or   option   exercised\tunder\t the
\n\t      corresponding provision of this Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)where,\t  in  respect  of   any\t  assessment
\n\t      completed before the commencement of this Act,
\n\t      a refund falls due after such commencement  or
\n\t      default is made after such commencement in the
\n\t      payment  of any sum due under  such  completed
\n\t      assessment,   the\t provisions  of\t  this\t Act
\n\t      relating\tto interest payable by\tthe  Central
\n\t      Government on refunds and interest payable  by
\n\t      the assessee for default shall apply;
\n\t      83 8\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)  any\tsum payable by\tway  of\t income-tax,
\n\t      supertax, interest, penalty or otherwise under
\n\t      the  repealed Act may be recovered under\tthis
\n\t      Act,  but\t without  prejudice  to\t any  action
\n\t      already  taken  for the recovery of  such\t sum
\n\t      under the repealed Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (k)any  agreement\t entered  into,\t appointment
\n\t      made,  approval  given,  recognition  granted,
\n\t      direction, instruction, notification, order or
\n\t      rule   issued  under  any\t provision  of\t the
\n\t      repealed Act shall, so far as it is not incon-
\n\t      sistent  with the corresponding  provision  of
\n\t      this Act, be deemed to have been entered into,
\n\t      made,  granted,  given  or  issued  under\t the
\n\t      corresponding  provision aforesaid  and  shall
\n\t      continue in force accordingly;
\n\t      (1)any  notification issued  under  subsection
\n\t      (I.) of section 60 of the repealed Act and  in
\n\t      force. immediately before the commencement  of
\n\t      this  Act\t shall,\t to  the  extent  to   which
\n\t      provision\t has not been made under  this\tAct,
\n\t      continue\tin  force  until  rescinded  by\t the
\n\t      Central Government;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (m)where\t the  period  prescribed   for\t any
\n\t      application,  appeal,  reference\tor  revision
\n\t      under  the  repealed  Act had  expired  on  or
\n\t      before  the commencement of this Act,  nothing
\n\t      in the Act shall be construed as enabling\t any
\n\t      such   application,   appeal,   reference\t  or
\n\t      revision\tto be made under this Act by  reason
\n\t      only of the fact that a longer period therefor
\n\t      is   prescribed  or  provision  is  made\t for
\n\t      extension\t of  time in suitable cases  by\t the
\n\t      appropriate authority.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      “S.   298(1961   Act).\tPower\tto    remove
\n\t      difficulties. (1) If any difficulty arises  in
\n\t      giving  effect to the provisions of this\tAct,
\n\t      the  Central  Government may,  by\t general  or
\n\t      special  order, do anything  not\tinconsistent
\n\t      with such provisions which appears to it to be
\n\t      necessary\t or expeditious for the\t purpose  of
\n\t      removing the difficulty.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (2)In particular, and without prejudice to the
\n\t      generality  of the foregoing power,  any\tsuch
\n\t      order  may  provide  for\tthe  adaptations  or
\n\t      modifications  subject to which  the  repealed
\n\t      Act shall apply in relation to the  assessment
\n\t      for the assessment year ending on the 31st day
\n\t      of March, 1962, or any earlier year.”
\n\t      “S. 6. (The General-Clauses Act).
\n\t      Where  this  Act,\t or  any  (Central  Act)  or
\n\t      Regulation made after the commencement of this
\n\t      Act, repeals any
\n\t      3 9
\n\t      enactment\t hitherto  made or hereafter  to  be
\n\t      made,  then,  unless  a  different   intention
\n\t      appears, the repeal shall not…………\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
In  exercise  of  the powers conferred\tunder  s.  298,\t the
\nCentral\t  Government  issued  the  Income-tax  (Removal\t  of
\nDifficulties)  Order,  1962,  which  was  published  in\t the
\nGazette\t of India on August 8, 1962.  Clauses 2, 3 and 4  of
\nthe said order read as follows
\n\t      “2.  Registration and refund proceedings to be
\n\t      regarded\tas part of Assessment  Proceedings:-
\n\t      For  the\tpurposes of clauses (a) and  (b)  of
\n\t      sub- section (2) of section 297 of the Income-
\n\t      tax  Act,\t 1961  (43  of\t1961)\t(hereinafter
\n\t      referred to as the repealing Act), proceedings
\n\t      relating to registration of a firm or a  claim
\n\t      for refund of tax shall be regarded as a\tpart
\n\t      of  the proceedings for the assessment of\t the
\n\t      person  concerned for the relevant  assessment
\n\t      year.\n<\/p>\n
\t      3.Completion  of assessments in cases  covered
\n\t      by section 297 (2) (b) of the repealing Act.In
\n\t      cases covered by clause (b) of sub-section (2)
\n\t      of  section  297\tof the\trepealing  Act.\t the
\n\t      assessments  shall  be made,  inter  alia,  in
\n\t      accordance with the procedure specified in the
\n\t      following sections of the repealing Act, in so
\n\t      far as they may be relevant for this purpose;
\n\t      Sections 131 to 136, 140 to 146, 1.53  [except
\n\t      sub  –  section (2) and clause (iii)  of\tsub-
\n\t      section (3)] 156 to 158. 185. 187 to 189,\t 282
\n\t      to 284 and 288.\n<\/p>\n
\t      4.Appeal.\t    reference\t or\trevision
\n\t      proceedings in respect of orders passed  under
\n\t      the  repealed Act.-( I Proceedings by  way  of
\n\t      the first or subsequent appeals, reference  or
\n\t      revision\tin respect of any order\t made  under
\n\t      the  Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (11 of  1922)
\n\t      (hereinafter referred to as the repealed\tAct)
\n\t      shall be instituted and disposed of as if\t the
\n\t      repealing Act had not been passed.\n<\/p>\n
\t      (2)Any  such proceedings instituted under\t the
\n\t      repealing\t Act  after the 31st day  of  March,
\n\t      1962, and before the date of this Order  shall
\n\t      be  deemed to have been instituted  under\t the
\n\t      repealed\tAct and shalt be disposed of  as  if
\n\t      the repealing Act had not been passed;
\n\t      Provided that if any such proceeding has\tbeen
\n\t      disposed\tof  before the (late of\t this  Order
\n\t      under  any provision of the repealing Act,  it
\n\t      shall be deemed to have been disposed of under
\n\t      the corresponding provision of
\n\t      L9Sup.Cl\/67- 10
\n\t      8 40
\n\t      the repeated Act and any appeal, reference  or
\n\t      revision\tin  respect  of\t the  proceeding  so
\n\t      disposed\tof shall be instituted and  disposed
\n\t      of  as  if  the repealing\t Act  had  not\tbeen
\n\t      passed.”\n<\/p>\n
The learned Judge held that the expression “proceedings\t for
\nthe  assessment”  in s. 297 (2) (a) of the 1961\t Act  had  a
\ncomprehensive meaning and included proceedings under s.\t 33A
\nor  s. 33B of the 1922 Act.  He also held that\tclauses\t (c)
\nand (d) of s. 297(2) of the 1961 Act must be deemed to\thave
\nbeen  enacted  by way of abundant caution.  In view  of\t his
\nfindings,  he  did not consider it  necessary  to  determine
\nwhether\t s.  6 of the General Clauses Act  saved  the  power
\nunder s. 33B of the 1922 Act, but lie observed :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “If  it had been necessary so to do,  I  would
\n\t      have no hesitation in holding that such  power
\n\t      would be saved under Section 6 clauses (c) and\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (e) of the General Clauses Act, there being no
\n\t      indication  to the contrary in  the  repealing
\n\t      Act of 1961.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      He accordingly dismissed the petition.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The  assessee appealed and the Division Bench dismissed\t the
\nappeal.\t  The  Division Bench came to  the  conclusion\tthat
\n“the.  provision for assessment are contained in Chapter  IV
\nof  the\t Act  of 1922 and section 33B finds  place  in\tthis
\nChapter and the expression “proceedings for the\t assessment”
\nindicates that any of the proceedings relating to assessment
\nas contemplated in Chapter IV can be initiated and continued
\nunder clause (a) of subsection (2) of section 297  including
\nthe proceeding by way of Revision under section 33B of\tthe,
\nAct.”  The  Division Bench repelled the\t contention  of\t the
\nassessee  that cl. (c) affected the scope of cl.  (it).\t  It
\nconcluded that cls. (d) and (f) had been inserted by way  of
\nabundant caution.  It also repelled the contention that\t cl.
\n(4) of the Income-tax (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1962,
\nwas  bad,  and observed that “what clause (4)  has  done  is
\nsimply to make explicit what was implicit in clause (a)\t and
\nit  is with the object of removing the doubt or\t difficulty,
\nif  any, existing in respect of the construction  of  clause\n<\/p>\n
(a) of section 297(2) that a specific provision like  clause
\n(4) was introduced in the Removal of Difficulties Order.” In
\nview  of these conclusions the Division Bench felt that\t “it
\nis  not\t necessary to express any definite  opinion  on\t the
\npoint whether section 6 of the General Clauses Act 1897,  is
\navailable for the purpose of interpreting the provisions  of
\nthe  Act  of  1961.” In the result  the\t appeal\t before\t the
\nDivision  Bench\t failed\t and was  dismissed.   The  assessee
\nhaving\tobtained a certificate of fitness under Art. 133  of
\nthe Constitution, the appeal is now before us.\n<\/p>\n
841<\/span><\/p>\n
The  learned  counsel  for the assessee\t contends  that\t the
\nexpression  “proceedings for the assessment” in s.  297\t (2)\n<\/p>\n
(a)  of\t the  1961 Act meant original  proceedings  for\t the
\nassessment  of\ta  person and not  appellate  or  revisional
\nproceedings.  He says that Parliament has left the  question
\nof  appeal and revision to be determined by  the.application
\nof  s. 6 of the General Clauses Act.  He further  says\tthat
\nthe  word “assessment” has not been used in its\t wide  sense
\nbecause\t Parliament  has  provided  for\t the  imposition  of
\npenalty\t in cls. (f) and (g), which ordinarily falls  within
\nthe wide sense of “assessment”.\n<\/p>\n
It  has\t also  provided for what is  to\t happen\t to  pending
\nproceedings in cl. (c).\t He urges that the High Court  erred
\nin  holding that these subclauses had been added by  way  of
\nabundant caution.\n<\/p>\n
The  learned  counsel for the respondent, Mr. S.  T.  Desai,
\nconends\t that s. 297 (2) (a) is comprehensive in  its  scope
\nand ampliude to include any proceedings under s. 33B of\t the
\n1922  Act. de further says that s. 6 of the General  Clauses
\nAct will apply of the extent there is no contrary  intention
\nin  s.\t297 (2) of the 1961 Act.  He finally  contends\tthat
\neven if there is any doubt regarding the scope of cl. (a) it
\nis  removed  by the, Removal of\t Difficulties  Order  issued
\nunder s. 298.\n<\/p>\n
It seems to us that the High Court is right in holding\tthat
\n297  (2)  (a)  of the 1961 Act includes\t with  its  scope  a
\nproceeding under s. 33B of the 1922 Act.  There is no  doubt
\nthat the word ‘assessment” does have subject to the  context
\na  very wide meaning.  The Privy Council in Commissioner  of
\nIncome Tax, Bombay  v.\t Khemchand Ramdas<\/a>(l) observed:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “In  order to answer them, it is essential  to
\n\t      bear in mind the method prescribed by the\t Act
\n\t      making  an assessment to tax, using  the\tword
\n\t      assessment  in  its  comprehensive  sense\t  as
\n\t      including\t the  whole procedure  for  imposing
\n\t      liability upon the tax payer.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      In   A.  N.  Lakshman  Shenoy  v.\t  Income-tax
\n\t      Officer, Ernakulam<\/a> this Court held
\n\t      “Now  the\t question is in what sense  has\t the
\n\t      word  “assessment” been used in section  13(1)
\n\t      of  the Finance Act, 1950.  Two  circumstances
\n\t      may  be noticed at once.\tThe long title\tsays
\n\t      that the Finance Act, 1950, is an Act to\tgive
\n\t      effect  to  the  financial  proposals  of\t the
\n\t      Central  Government for the year beginning  on
\n\t      April  1,\t 1950,\tand  in\t section  13(1)\t the
\n\t      collocation of the words is “levy,  assessment
\n\t      and collection of income-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (1) 6 I.T.R. 414 at p.423.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (2) 34 I.T.R. 275 at p. 291.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      842<\/span><\/p>\n
\t      tax”.\tIn   our   opinion,    both    these
\n\t      circumstances  point towards  a  comprehensive
\n\t      meaning; for it could not have been  intended,
\n\t      as  part\tof  the\t proposal  of  the   Central
\n\t      Government,   that  those\t whose\tincome\t had
\n\t      totally  escaped assessment should  be  liable
\n\t      but  those who had been under-assessed  should
\n\t      go scot free.  We can see nothing in the words
\n\t      of  the  section which would  justify  such  a
\n\t      distinction; we say this quite apart from\t the
\n\t      argument\t that\tsection\t 13(1)\t should\t  be
\n\t      interpreted  in consonance with the  financial
\n\t      agreement entered into between the  Rajpramukh
\n\t      and  the\tPresident, an argument to  which  we
\n\t      shall   presently\t  advert.    Moreover,\t the
\n\t      collocation  of the words, “levy,\t assessment,
\n\t      and  collection” indicates that what is  meant
\n\t      is  the  entire process by which\tthe  tax  is
\n\t      ascertained, demanded and realised.”
\n\t      In  C.  A.  Abraham.  v.\t Income-tax  Officer
\n\t      Kottayam<\/a>(1) this Court observed :
\n\t      “A  review of the provisions of Chapter IV  of
\n\t      the  Act sufficiently discloses that the\tword
\n\t      “assessment”  has\t been  used  in\t its  widest
\n\t      connotation in that Chapter.  The title of the
\n\t      chapter  is “Deductions and Assessment”.\t The
\n\t      section which deals with assessment merely  as
\n\t      computation  of  income  is  section  23;\t but
\n\t      several sections deal not with computation  of
\n\t      income,\tbut  determination   of\t  liability,
\n\t      machinery\t for  imposing\tliability  and\t the
\n\t      procedure\t in that behalf.  Section 18A  deals
\n\t      with advance payment of tax and imposition  of
\n\t      penalties\t  for  failure\tto  carry  out\t the
\n\t      provisions  therein.  Section 23A\t deals\twith
\n\t      power to assess individual members of  certain
\n\t      companies\t on the income deemed to  have\tbeen
\n\t      distributed  as  dividend, section  23B  deals
\n\t      with  assessment\tin case\t of  departure\tfrom
\n\t      taxable  territories, section 24B\t deals\twith
\n\t      collection  of  tax  out\tof  the\t estate\t  of
\n\t      deceased\t persons,  section  25\tdeals\twith
\n\t      assessment  in case of discontinued  business,
\n\t      section 25A with assessment after partition of
\n\t      Hindu undivided families and sections 29,\t 31.
\n\t      33  and  35  deal with  the  issue  of  demand
\n\t      notices  and  the filing of  appeals  and\t for
\n\t      reviewing assessment and section 34 deals with
\n\t      assessment  of  incomes  which  have   escaped
\n\t      assessment.  The expression “assessment”\tused
\n\t      in  these sections is not used merely  in\t the
\n\t      sense of computation of income and there is in
\n\t      our  judgment no ground for holding that\twhen
\n\t      by  section  44,\tit  is\tdeclared  that\t the
\n\t      partners\tor members of the association  shall
\n\t      be jointly and severally liable to assessment.
\n\t      it is only intended to declare the
\n\t      (I  41 I.T.R. 425 -,it pp. 429-430.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      843<\/span><\/p>\n
\t      liability\t to  computation  of  income   under
\n\t      section  23 and not to the application of\t the
\n\t      procedure\t for declaration and  imposition  of
\n\t      tax   liability\tand   the   machinery\t for
\n\t      enforcement thereof.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
In  Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bhikaji Dadabhai &  Co.<\/a>(1)
\nthis  Court quoted with approval the observations  regarding
\nthe word “assessment” in Abraham v. Income-tax Officer(-).
\nIn Commissioner of Income-tax v. Paiiala Cement Co. Ltd.<\/a>(
\na similar question arose.  The question was whether under s.
\n13  of\tthe  Finance Act, 1950, the appeals  in\t respect  of
\nassessments  for 1949-50 would be governed ‘by\tthe  Patiala
\nIncome-tax  Act, 2001, or by the Indian Income-tax Act.\t  We
\nmay here set out s. 13 of the Finance Act, 1950 :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “If  immediately before the 1st day of  April,
\n\t      1950,  there is in force in any Part  B  State
\n\t      other  than  Jammu  and  Kashmir\tor  Manipur,
\n\t      Tripura  or Vindhya Pradesh or in\t the  merged
\n\t      territory\t of Cooch-Behar any law relating  to
\n\t      income-tax  or super-tax or tax on profits  of
\n\t      business, that law shall cease to have  effect
\n\t      except   for   the  purposes  of\t the   levy,
\n\t      assessment  and collection of  income-tax\t and
\n\t      super-tax\t  in  respect  of  any\tperiod\t not
\n\t      included in the previous year for the purposes
\n\t      of assessment under the Indian Income-tax Act,
\n\t      1922 (XI of 1922) for the year ending on\t31st
\n\t      day  of  March, 1951, or\tfor  any  subsequent
\n\t      year,  or,  as  the case\tmay  be,  the  levy,
\n\t      assessment  and  collection  of  the  tax\t  on
\n\t      profits\tof  business  for   any\t  chargeable
\n\t      accounting period ending on or before the 31st
\n\t      day of March, 1949.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This Court held that it is the provisions of the Patiala Act
\n2001  that applied.  No point was raised that in  any  event
\nthe Patiala Act having ceased to have effect, the provisions
\ndealing\t with  appeals\twere not concerned  with  the  levy,
\nassessment an( collection of income-tax.
\nIn  Bhailal  Amin & Sons Ltd. v. R. P. Dalal(1)\t the  Bombay
\nHigh  Court (Chagla, C.J., & Shah J.), interpreting s. 7  of
\nthe Taxation Laws (Extension to Merged States and Amendment)
\nAct (LXVII of 1949) the relevant portion of which is in\t the
\nfollowing terms :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “7. (1) If, immediately before the 26th day of
\n\t      August, 1949, there was in force in any of the
\n\t      merged States any law relating to\t income-tax,
\n\t      super-tax,  or business profits tax, that\t law
\n\t      shall cease to have effect
\n\t      (1)42 I.T.R. 123 at p. 127.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (3)32 I.T.R. 333.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (2)   41 I.T.R. 42 5
\n\t      (4)   24 I.T.R. 229
\n\t      844<\/span>
\n\t      except   for   the  purposes  of\t the   levy,
\n\t      assessment  and collection of income-tax,\t and
\n\t      super-tax\t  in  respect  of  any\tperiod\t not
\n\t      included in the previous year for the purposes
\n\t      of assessment under the Indian Income-tax Act,
\n\t      1922, as extended to that State by Section  3,
\n\t      or, as the case may be,, the levy,  assessment
\n\t      and collection of business profits tax for any
\n\t      chargeable  accounting  period  ending  on  or
\n\t      before  the 31st day of March, 1948,  and\t for
\n\t      any   purposes  connected\t with\tsuch   levy,
\n\t      assessment or collection……….
\n\t      observed
\n\t      “It  is  urged  by  Mr.  Palkiwalla  for\t the
\n\t      petitioners  that the words “levy,  assessment
\n\t      and  collection”\tdo not include\ta  right  of
\n\t      appeal  against the assessment order  and\t the
\n\t      Baroda  law did not continue to apply  to\t any
\n\t      rights  of appeal that the  petitioners  might
\n\t      have   had   in  respect\tof  the\t  order\t  of
\n\t      assessment.    In\t the  first  instance\tthis
\n\t      argument\tappears\t to  me to  be\ta  perfectly
\n\t      futile argument, because, if I were induced to
\n\t      take such a view of the section it would leave
\n\t      the petitioners without any right of appeal at
\n\t      all.   If the Baroda Act ceases to  apply\t and
\n\t      obviously the Indian Act does not apply to the
\n\t      assessments  of accounting years prior to\t the
\n\t      accounting year 1948-49, there is no right  of
\n\t      appeal;  and  the petitioners could  not\thave
\n\t      gone  to the Tribunal at all, for there is  no
\n\t      other  section  or sections which\t confer\t any
\n\t      right  of appeal under the  Indian  Income-tax
\n\t      Act, in respect of assessments made under\t the
\n\t      Baroda  Act.   But,  apart from  this,  in  my
\n\t      opinion  the words “for the purposes of  levy,
\n\t      assessment   and\tcollection   of\t  incometax”
\n\t      include all procedure for the levy, assessment
\n\t      and collection of income-tax, for without\t the
\n\t      procedure there can be no levy, assessment  or
\n\t      collection;    and   taking   in\t  particular
\n\t      “assessment”  with which we are  concerned  on
\n\t      this  petition  the assessment  is  not  final
\n\t      until all remedies by way of appeals which are
\n\t      given by the Act are exhausted.  This view  is
\n\t      emphasized  by the concluding, words  of\tsub-
\n\t      section  (1)  which are “for any\tpurposes  in
\n\t      connection  with\tsuch  levy,  assessment\t and
\n\t      collection.”  There  can in any  event  be  no
\n\t      doubt   that  the\t procedure  for\t  assessment
\n\t      including rights of appeal are included in the
\n\t      words “purposes connected with assessment.” In
\n\t      my  opinion. therefore. the true\tconstruction
\n\t      of  sub-section (1) of section 7 is  that\t the
\n\t      Baroda   Act   continues\tto  apply   to\t the
\n\t      assessments of the petitioners even as regards
\n\t      the right of apeal which was given under\tthat
\n\t      Act to the Huzur Adalat.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      84 5
\n\t      .lm0
\n\t      It  is quite clear from the authorities  cited
\n\t      above  that the word .assessment” can  bear  a
\n\t      very comprehensive meaning; it can  comprehend
\n\t      the  whole  procedure  for  ascertaining\t and
\n\t      imposing\tliability  upon the  tax-payer.\t  Is
\n\t      there then any thing in the context of s.\t 297
\n\t      which  compels  us to give to  the  expression
\n\t      “procedure  for the assessment”  the  narrower
\n\t      meaning  suggested by the learned counsel\t for
\n\t      the  appellant  ? In our view, the  answer  to
\n\t      this  question  must be in the  negative.\t  It
\n\t      seems to us that s. 297 is meant to provide as
\n\t      far  as possible for all\tcontingencies  which
\n\t      may arise out of the repeal of the 1922  Act.’
\n\t      It deals with pending appeals, revisions, etc.
\n\t      It   deals  with\t Don-completed\t assessments
\n\t      pending  at the commencement of the  1961\t Act
\n\t      and   assessments\t  to  be  made\t after\t the
\n\t      commencement  of the 1961 Act as a  result  of
\n\t      returns of income filed after the commencement
\n\t      of  the  1961 Act.  Then in cl. (d)  it  deals
\n\t      with assessments in respect of escaped income;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      in  cls.\t(f)  & (g) it  deals  with  levy  of
\n\t      penalties;  cl.  (h) continues the  effect  of
\n\t      elections or declarations made under the\t1922
\n\t      Act; cl. (i) deals with refunds; cl. (i) deals
\n\t      with  recovery; cl. (k) deals  generally\twith
\n\t      all  agreements, notifications, orders  issued
\n\t      under  the  1922 Act; cl.\t (1)  continues\t the
\n\t      notifications  issued  under s. 60(1)  of\t the
\n\t      1922  Act\t and  cl. (in)\tguards\tagainst\t the
\n\t      application  of a longer period of  limitation
\n\t\t\t    prescribed\tunder  the  1961  Act  to
\n  certain
\n\t      applications,  appeals,  etc.   It  is  hardly
\n\t      believable in this context that Parliament did
\n\t      not think of appeals and revisions in  respect
\n\t      of assessment orders already made or which  it
\n\t      had authorised to be made under cl. (a) of  s.
\n\t      297(2).\n<\/p>\n
\t      The learned counsel for the appellant  submits
\n\t      that  Parliament\thad  s.\t 6  of\tthe  General
\n\t      Clauses Act in view, and therefore no  express
\n\t      provision\t was made, dealing with appeals\t and
\n\t      revisions,  etc.\t In our view, s.  6  of\t the
\n\t      General Clauses Act would not apply because s.
\n\t      297(2) evidences an intention to the contrary.
\n\t      In  Union\t of India v.  Madan  Gopal  Kabra<\/a>(l)
\n\t      while  interpreting s. 13 of the Finance\tAct,
\n\t      1950, already extracted above, this
\n\t      Court observed at p. 68 :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “Nor can Section 6 of the General Clauses Act,
\n\t      1897, serve to keep alive the liability to pay
\n\t      tax on the income of the year 1949-50 assuming
\n\t      it  to have accrued under the  repeated  State
\n\t      law,  for\t a  “different\tintention”   clearly
\n\t      appears  in Sections 2 and 13′ of the  Finance
\n\t      Act read together ‘as indicated above.”
\nIt is true that whether a different intention appears or not
\nmust  depend on the language and content of s.\t297(2).\t  It
\nseems to us, however, that by providing for so many  matters
\nmentioned  above, some in accord with what would  have\tbeen
\nthe result under\n<\/p>\n
1)   25 I.T.R. 58.\n<\/p>\n
846<\/span><\/p>\n
s.   6 of tile General Clauses Act and some contrary to what
\nwould  been  the result under s. 6, Parliament\thas  clearly
\nevidenced an intention to the contrary.
\nIf s. 6 of the General Clauses Act is out of the way,  there
\nis no doubt that Parliament should not be credited with\t the
\nintention  of not providing for appeals and revisions,\tetc.
\nagainst\t the assessment orders made under the 1922 Act.\t  In
\nthis context, we must ( give the expression “proceedings for
\nthe  assessment of that person ” in cl. (a) of s.  297(2)  a
\nvery comprehensive the-meaning
\nAt  any\t rate, if the Income Tax  (Removal  of\tDifliculties
\nOrder,\t.1962,\tis valid, para 4 of the said  order  clearly
\ncovers\tthe present case and would give jurisdiction to\t the
\nCommissioner to issue the impugned notice.
\nRelying\t on  Jalan Trading Company (Private)  Ltd.  v.\tMill
\nMadoor Union<\/a>(1) thelearned counsel for the appellant  urges
\nthat s. 298 is void. In\t our view, the present\tcase  is
\ncovered by the decision of thisCourt in Commissioner  of
\nIncome-tax  v.Dewan  Bahadur Ramgopal MillS ( 2\t )  where  a
\nsimilar order the Taxation Laws (Part B States) (Removal  of
\nDifficulties)  Order, 1950, made under s. 12 of the  Finance
\nAct, 1950, was upheld.\tSection 12 read as follows :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “If any difficulty arises in giving effect  to
\n\t      the  provisions of any of the Acts,  rules  or
\n\t      orders extended by section 3 or section I I to
\n\t      any  State  or merged territory,\tthe  Central
\n\t      Government may, by order, make such provision,
\n\t      or give such direction, as appears to it to
\n\t      be necessary for removing the difficulty.”
\n\t      S.    K.\tDas,  J.,  speaking  for  the  Court
\n\t      observed at p. 288
\n\t      “Furthermore,  the  true scope and  effect  of
\n\t      section\t 12
\n\t      seems  to\t be  that  it  is  for\tthe  Central
\n\t      Government   to determine if any difficulty of
\n\t      the nature       indicated  in the section has
\n\t      arisen  and then to make such order,  or\tgive
\n\t      such  direction,\tas  appears  to\t it  to\t  be
\n\t      necessary\t   to\tremove\t  the\t difficulty.
\n\t      Parliament   has\tleft  the  matter   to\t the
\n\t      executive;   ‘but\t that  does  not  make\t the
\n\t      notification  of 1956 bad.  In Pandit  Banarsi
\n\t      Das  Bhanot v.  State of Madhya Pradehs(3)  we
\n\t      said  at\tp. 435 : “Now, the  authorities\t are
\n\t      clear that it is not unconstitutional for\t the
\n\t      legislature  to leave it to the  executive  to
\n\t      determine\t details relating to the working  of
\n\t      taxation\tlaws,  such  as\t the  selection\t  of
\n\t      persons  on  whom the tax is to be  laid,\t the
\n\t      rates at which it is to be charged in  respect
\n\t      of different classes of goods, and the  like.”
\n\t      We are, therefore,
\n\t      (1)[1966] 11 L.L..J. 546.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (3)9 S.T.C. 388.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (2) 41 I.T.R. 28).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      847<\/span><\/p>\n
\t      of the view that the notification of 1956\t was
\n\t      validly made under section 12 and is not ultra
\n\t      vires  the  powers conferred  on\tthe  Central
\n\t      Government by that section.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It  is\ttrue  that  in\tthat case  the\tattack\twas  on\t the
\nnotification and, not on the section itself, but it seems to
\nits that the ratio even by the Court is appropriate to cover
\nthe validity of the section
\nitself. Furthermore, the terms of s. 37 of the Payment\tof
\nBonus  Act,  1965 are different and the Bonus Act is  not  a
\ntaxing law.\n<\/p>\n
In   the  result  the  appeal fails and\t is  dismissed\twith
\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n
R.K.P.S.\t\t\t Appeal dismissed..\n848<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West … on 1 May, 1967 Equivalent citations: 1968 AIR 162, 1967 SCR (3) 833 Author: S Sikri Bench: Sikri, S.M. PETITIONER: KALAWATI DEVI HARLALKA Vs. RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01\/05\/1967 BENCH: SIKRI, S.M. BENCH: SIKRI, S.M. […]<\/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-221890","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nKalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 1 May, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 1 May, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1967-04-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-14T20:40:56+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=\"28 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West … on 1 May, 1967\",\"datePublished\":\"1967-04-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-14T20:40:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967\"},\"wordCount\":5061,\"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\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967\",\"name\":\"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 1 May, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1967-04-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-14T20:40:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West … on 1 May, 1967\"}]},{\"@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":"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 1 May, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 1 May, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1967-04-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-14T20:40:56+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":"28 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West … on 1 May, 1967","datePublished":"1967-04-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-14T20:40:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967"},"wordCount":5061,"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\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967","name":"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 1 May, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1967-04-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-14T20:40:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalawati-devi-harlalka-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-west-on-1-may-1967#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kalawati Devi Harlalka vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West … on 1 May, 1967"}]},{"@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\/221890","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=221890"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221890\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221890"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221890"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221890"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}