COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. BHAILALBHAI MATHURBHAI PATEL

ITR/281/1995HC GujaratGJHC24022604199522 December 2005Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) referred two questions of law to the Gujarat High Court at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Revenue) concerning the assessment year 1988-89. The respondent is Bhaialalbhai Mathurbhai Patel (Assessee). The first question pertains to the ITAT's reliance on its own decision in the case of Mahendra R. Divecha. The second question concerns the taxability of an amount received by the assessee for surrendering tenancy rights, in light of an amendment to Section 55 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court heard arguments from both the Revenue and the Assessee.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that for question No. 2, it is common ground between the parties that the issue stands concluded by the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. D.P.Sandu Bros Chembur P.Ltd. (2005) 273 ITR Pg.1. Applying the ratio of this decision, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no part of the amount received by the assessee for surrendering the tenancy right is taxable. Question No. 2 is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee. Regarding question No. 1, the Court found that it does not arise from the order of the Tribunal and is therefore returned unanswered. Furthermore, considering that question No. 2 has been concluded by the Apex Court's decision, question No. 1 is rendered academic. The reference stands disposed of accordingly.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide two questions of law. 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in relying on its own decision in the case of Mahendra R. Divecha, when a statement of case had already been drawn by the Tribunal in that case dated 27.10.1993? (Question of law) 2. Whether, in view of the spirit behind the amendment to Section 55, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that no part of the amount received by the assessee for surrendering of tenancy right is taxable? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning Section 55 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Contentions: Assessee: Not recorded in detail for question 2, but impliedly supports the Tribunal's decision. For question 1, the reliance on its own decision is justified. Revenue: Argued for the taxability of the amount received for surrendering tenancy rights. For question 1, it questioned the Tribunal's reliance on its prior decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 55,Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITR/281/1995 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 281 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 ? ================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - Applicant(s) Versus BHAILALBHAI MATHURBHAI PATEL - Respondent(s) ================================================ Appearance : MR MANISH R BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1,M/S.VYAS ASSOCIATES for Applicant(s) : 1, MR RK PATEL for Respondent(s) : 1, ================================================

ITR/281/1995 2/4 JUDGMENT CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA and HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI Date : 22/12/2005 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTI

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 55

All 124 judgments and leading authorities on Section 55 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →