COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ROHITBHAI CHINUBHAI

ITR/132/1994HC GujaratGJHC24020209199429 September 2005Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Revenue) has referred a question of law to the High Court of Gujarat concerning assessment year 1987-88, relating to the accounting period ending March 31, 1986. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had deleted an addition of Rs. 69,260, which represented remuneration received by the assessee's wife from Rajiv Traders Pvt. Ltd. The assessee held a substantial interest in this company. The ITAT's decision was based on its prior rulings in the assessee's own cases for assessment years 1977-78, 1984-85, and 1985-86. The Revenue challenged the ITAT's deletion of this addition, invoking Section 64 of the Income Tax Act.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 69,260. The Court noted that the issue in question was concluded in favour of the assessee by a previous decision of the same Court in the assessee's own case, specifically Income Tax Reference No. 126 of 1987, dated December 26, 2000. This earlier decision had followed the High Court's ruling in Ashaben Rohitbhai and others v. C.I.T., 237 ITR 561 (Guj). Therefore, the question referred to the Court was answered in the affirmative, meaning in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference was disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 69,260 being remuneration received by the wife of the assessee from Rajiv Traders Pvt. Ltd. in which the assessee had substantial interest, invoking the provisions of section 64 of the I.T. Act? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. However, the fact that the Tribunal deleted the addition and the subsequent High Court decision in favour of the assessee implies the assessee's position was that the addition was wrongly made. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the addition of Rs. 69,260, representing remuneration paid to the assessee's wife from a company in which the assessee had a substantial interest, should be included in the assessee's income by invoking the provisions of Section 64 of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue sought to challenge the ITAT's deletion of this addition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 64,Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITR/132/1994 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 132 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 ROHITBHAI CHINUBHAI - Respondent(s) ============================================================== Appearance : MR MANISH R BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, ================================================================== CORAM :  HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA and HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI Date : 29/09/2005 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI) 1.The Income Tax

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 64

All 83 judgments and leading authorities on Section 64 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →