COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. INVENTA A G

ITR/238/1994HC GujaratGJHC24020314199421 November 2005Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) referred a question of law to the Gujarat High Court concerning the assessment year 1983-84 and the relevant accounting period ending March 31, 1983. The dispute involved the tax rate applicable to the assessee, M/s. Invents A.G. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) had levied tax at 40%, while the ITAT held that the case was covered by Section 115A(1)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, making tax leviable at 20%. The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, was the applicant, and the assessee was the respondent. Notice to the respondent was unserved, but the court proceeded due to the concluded nature of the issue against the revenue.

What did the High Court hold?

The Gujarat High Court, in its oral judgment, answered the referred question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The court noted that an identical question had been referred by the ITAT in Income Tax Reference No. 95 of 1990, concerning the assessee's own case for Assessment Year 1982-83. By an order dated April 7, 2004, this Court had already answered that question in the affirmative, meaning it was decided in favour of the assessee. Therefore, for the reasons stated in the previous order, the present reference was also answered in favour of the assessee. The operative direction was that the reference stands disposed of accordingly. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessee's case is covered by the provisions of Section 115A(1)(b)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and therefore, tax was leviable at the rate of 20% against 40% levied by the Income-tax Officer? Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its learned Standing Counsel, drew the court's attention to a previous identical reference (Income Tax Reference No. 95 of 1990 for Assessment Year 1982-83) where the court had answered the question in favour of the assessee. This implies the revenue's contention would be that the ITAT's decision was incorrect, but this is not explicitly stated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115A(1)(b)(ii),Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITR/238/1994 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 238 of 1994 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 M/s.INVENTS A. G. - Respondent(s) ================================================ Appearance : MR MANISH R BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1, NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) : 1, ================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA and HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI

ITR/238/1994 2/3 JUDGMENT Date : 21/11/2005 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI) 1 The Income Tax Appellate Trib

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 →