COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. JYOTI FAMILY TRUST,

PDF · subscribers
ITR/103/1997HC GujaratGJHC24020267199731 August 2006Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.S.GARG3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court accepted the submissions made by the learned counsel for both parties. The Court held that the orders passed by the Tribunal in each of the cases are hereby set aside. Without deciding the questions of law, the High Court remanded the matters back to the learned Tribunal. The Tribunal was directed to reconsider the entire matter and redetermine the liability of the assessee, who is the beneficiary of the first-level Trust. The Tribunal was given the liberty to reconsider the matters afresh and decide them in accordance with the law. The Court also directed the Tribunal to take into consideration the judgments in the matter of McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. C.T.O., Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan, and other cited cases on which reliance was placed by the parties. The Court refused to make any observations on the merits of the matters to avoid adversely affecting the rights of either party. The References were accordingly disposed of.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Revenue) filed Income Tax References (ITRs) No. 101, 102, and 103 of 1997 before the Gujarat High Court against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). The assessee is Aparna Family Trust. The parties submitted that the Tribunal's decisions in these matters relied on its earlier judgment in the case of Sanjiv Family Trust. This Sanjiv Family Trust matter had been referred to the High Court as ITR No. 149/95. The parties further stated that ITR No. 149/95 and analogous matters were disposed of on July 13, 2006, wherein this Court had set aside the Tribunal's order and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal with certain directions. Consequently, the parties requested that the present matters also be set aside and remanded to the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should set aside the orders passed by the Tribunal and remand the matters to the Tribunal for reconsideration, given that the foundational judgment relied upon by the Tribunal has been set aside by the High Court and remanded back. Assessee's Contention: The assessee contended that since the Tribunal's order was based on its judgment in Sanjiv Family Trust, which has now been set aside and remanded by the High Court, the orders in the present appeals have lost their foundation. Therefore, the matters should be remanded back to the Tribunal with similar directions as issued in the Sanjiv Family Trust case. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue concurred with the assessee's submission that the matters should be remanded back to the Tribunal for reconsideration, as the basis of the Tribunal's decision has been invalidated by the High Court's order in the Sanjiv Family Trust case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ITR/101/1997 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 101 of 1997 With INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 102 of 1997 To INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 103 of 1997 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - Applicant(s) Versus APARNA FAMILY TRUST, - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MRS. MONA R BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1, MR SN SOPARKAR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ITR/101/1997 2/3

JUDGMENT Date : 31/08/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG)

1.

The parties submit that the Tribunal, while deciding the matters has relied upon its earlier judgment in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust and issued certain directions. The said matter of Sanjiv Family Trust was referred to this Court and ITR No. 149/95 was accordingly registered. The parties submit that ITR No. 149/95 with its analogous matters is finally disposed of on 13.7.06, order passed in the said matter has been set aside by this Court and the matter has been remanded back to the Tribunal with certain directions. The parties submit that as the very foundation of the order impugned has become nonest, the orders passed by the Tribunal may be set aside and the matters be remanded back to the Tribunal with directions as issued in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust.

2.

After hearing the parties and going through our order, dated 13.7.06 in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust Vs. CIT in ITR No. 149/95, we are of the opinion that the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties must be accepted.

3.

The orders passed by the Tribunal in each of the case are hereby set aside. Without deciding the questions, we remand the matter to the learned Tribunal with a direction that the Tribunal

ITR/101/1997 3/3 JUDGMENT shall reconsider the entire matter and redetermine the liability of the assessee, that is, the beneficiary of the first level Trust. It would be open to the Tribunal to reconsider the matters afresh and decide the matters in accordance with law after taking into consideration the judgments in the matter of McDowell & Co. Ltd., v.. C.T.O., reported n 154 [R.S. GARG, J.] [M.R. SHAH, J.] pirzada/-

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →