Find a Lawyer

Application No. 5 of 1977, decided on 22nd July, 1980.

Income‑tax Act (XI of 1922)‑

-----S. 66‑Questions of law and fact‑Tribunal holding no sufficient material having existed before income‑tax authorities to make fresh assessment‑Held: Such finding does not give rise to a question of law and being a finding on question of fact conclusive and not open to question.

Habibul Islam Bhuiyan for Applicant.

Nemo for Respondent.

SYED MUHAMMAD HUSAIN, J.

‑This is aft application at the instance of the Commissioner of Taxes, Chittagong Zone under section 66 of the Income‑tax Act for the decision of this Court on the question whether the Tribunal rightly held that the Income‑tax Officer bad no material before it to warrant any reopening of the case of the assessee under section 34 of the Income‑tax Act. The Income‑tax Officer and the Appellate Commis sioner ordered for such re‑assessment alleging fresh information against the assessee, the Tribunal however held otherwise. Whether there was sufficient material before the authorities to warrant a fresh re‑assessment under section 34 of the Income‑tax Act is a question of fact wherein the finding of the Tribunal being the final authority thereon is otherwise con clusive. The Tribunal held that there was no justification for the re‑opening of the assessment by issuance of notice under section 34 of the Income‑tax Act, since there was no question of concealment or suppression of any income whatsoever. No question of law having been raised herein this application must be rejected.

Application rejected.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.