MANORMA SARABHAI TRUST NO.7 vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

ITR/272/1995HC GujaratGJHC24022595199526 December 2005Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

This case involves an Income Tax Reference filed by Manorma Sarabhai Trust No. 7 (the assessee) and the Commissioner of Income-tax (the revenue) before the High Court of Gujarat. The reference arises from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A'. The core of the dispute concerns the taxability of shares, debentures, and bonds received by the assessee from amalgamated companies. The assessment years are not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves the Tribunal referring two questions of law to the High Court under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Gujarat, in its oral judgment, decided not to answer the reference. It was noted that it was common ground between the parties that the reference ought not to be answered in light of the facts and circumstances of the case. This was due to the assessee being a shareholder of the same company in which, for other shareholders, the reference was left unanswered because of the stand taken by the revenue. Consequently, the Court followed its earlier decision in CIT Vs. Leena Sarabhai (N.CH) (1996) 221 ITR 520, leaving the reference unanswered and disposing of it accordingly. No specific finding was given on the merits of the exemption under Section 47(vii) or the definition of transfer under Section 2(47).

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide two questions of law: 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under Section 47(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (At the instance of the assessee) 2. Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that when the assessee received shares, debentures and bonds of amalgamated companies, there was no transfer under Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act and consequently no capital gains tax could be charged? (At the instance of the Department) Assessee's contentions: The assessee sought exemption under Section 47(vii). Revenue's contentions: The revenue argued that the receipt of shares, debentures, and bonds of amalgamated companies constituted a transfer under Section 2(47) and thus attracted capital gains tax. The judgment does not explicitly detail the arguments for each side beyond framing the questions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 256(1),Section 47(vii),Section 2(47)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITR/272/1995 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 272 of 1995 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI ================================================ 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 ? ================================================ MANORMA SARABHAI TRUST NO.7 - Applicant(s) Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - Respondent(s) ================================================ Appearance : MR RK PATEL for Applicant(s) : 1, MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent(s) : 1, ================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA and HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI

ITR/272/1995 2/3 JUDGMENT Date : 26/12/2005 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI) 1 The Income Tax Appellate Tribuna

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 256(1)

All 370 judgments and leading authorities on Section 256(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →