HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Bidi Supply Co. v. Union of India and Others
Petition 271 of 1955
[1956] SCR 267 ·
Indian Income-tax Act 1922, sections 5(7A), 64(1), 64(2), 64(5)(b) · Constitution Article 14
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
5-judge bench · S. R. Das C.J. · Vivian Bose · N. H. Bhagwati · B. Jagannadhadas · B. P. Sinha
Assessment years: 1948–49, 1949–50, 1950–51, 1955–56 notice
01 · Facts of the case
A Calcutta-based business with factories in Bihar challenged a Board order transferring its case to Ranchi without identifying pending assessment years or limiting duration. No hearing preceded the omnibus transfer.
Source: Primary report: SCR 268–275
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The majority construed the then section 5(7A) as authorising transfer of a particular pending assessment case, not an unlimited prospective transfer. The invalid executive direction deprived the petitioner of its section 64 position in a discriminatory manner. Bose J. concurred in relief but took the broader view that the transfer provisions were unconstitutional.
Source: Primary report: SCR 275–287
03 · Judicial decision
Petition allowed; transfer order set aside and restraint against the Ranchi officer granted under prayer (c), with costs.
Source: Primary report: SCR 278
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Assessee obtained relief against the particular omnibus transfer.
Source: Primary report: SCR 275–278
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Keep the majority statutory ground separate from Bose J.’s broader constitutional reasoning. The majority expressly left constitutionality of section 5(7A) and other constitutional grounds undecided. Later amendments and transfer decisions require separate review.
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
Complete 21-page Supreme Court Reports scan. Any adjoining report fragments remain in the unchanged original and are excluded from this analysis.
Statutory scope
Historical legislation expressly identified in this note. This is not a decision under the Income-tax Act, 1961 or the Income-tax Act, 2025. Verify enacted wording, commencement, transition and subsequent judicial treatment independently before modern reliance.
Later treatment
Source checked 2026-10-23. Subsequent treatment and present-law applicability have not been comprehensively checked.
Page references identify the supplied PDF; paragraph references identify the judgment unless stated otherwise.
AI disclosure & professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note uses AI assistance and a preserved full-primary review, with refreshed exact original-byte verification. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding.