9911796707
TMI Blog1959 (4) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JUDGMENT Prasanta Behari Mukherjee, J. This is an application by John Patterson Co. (India) Ltd. under article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari and mandamus challenging certain income-tax assessment orders and certificate proceedings. The dispute arises with regard to the assessment of R.W. Baddley, an employee of the petitioner. He was employed as a sales manager on a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ponsible for paying in this case means the company itself and not the principal officer of the company as described. The point is too technical to be either sound or good. By an explanation to section 18, which was introduced subsequent to the assessments in question, the expression person responsible for paying is expressly now included to mean the principal officer of a company. It is said th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agency who under the law generally is the person most competent to act for the company. Reliance was placed on an old decision of the East Punjab High Court in Janda Rubber Works Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [1950] 18 I.T.R. 951. In that case, the argument was the other way about. The argument was that the company as such could not be called upon to pay and the principal officer should be the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se facts the petitioner company can escape the liability. Lastly, the petitioner company has pleaded in the petition a letter dated the 2nd December, 1946, from Baddley himself that he would pay the income-tax on the commission which he had earned and he would undertake to deal direct with the Income-tax Department. That agreement, however, cannot affect the right of the income-tax authorities ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
