HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay v. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co.
Civil Appeal No. 128 of 1955
[1959] 1 SCR 713 ·
Indian Income-tax Act, 1922: sections 23(5), 26A, 30, 31, 33B
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
3-judge bench · T. L. Venkatarama Aiyar · P. B. Gajendragadkar · A. K. Sarkar
Assessment years: 1947-48, 1948-49, 1949-50
01 · Facts of the case
The firm obtained renewed registration and appealed its assessments. Two appeals were decided and one was pending when the Commissioner cancelled registration because a minor was a partner and directed consequential reassessment.
Source: Primary report: SCR 715–719
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
Merger depends on the subject matter within appellate jurisdiction. An order granting registration was not appealable and could not be cancelled by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in the assessment appeal. It therefore did not merge. Pendency alone likewise did not suspend the original order. Appellate assessment figures could not themselves be revised under section 33B.
Source: Primary report: SCR 720–727
03 · Judicial decision
The Commissioner could cancel the registration orders. His direction was construed as requiring consequential collection changes as an unregistered firm, preserving the income already fixed on appeal.
Source: Primary report: SCR 727–728
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Revenue appeal allowed with costs throughout; all referred questions were answered in its favour.
Source: Primary report: SCR 729
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Distinguish the independent registration order from the assessment actually disposed of on appeal. Do not read the judgment as permitting revision of an appellate assessment or universal reopening without notice.
Source: Primary report: SCR 727–728
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
Complete 17-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.