COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GUJCHEM DISTILLERS INDIA LTD.

ITA/300/1999HC GujaratGJHC24025039199907 August 2002Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT S. SHAH,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.A.PUJ2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) filed an application before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad seeking a reference on a question of law concerning assessment year 1985-86. The assessee is Gujchem Distillers India Ltd. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had previously rejected the revenue's application for a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The ITAT's order rejecting the reference application was passed on November 19, 1998. The High Court noted that over three and a half years had elapsed since the ITAT's order.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the revenue's application for a reference. The Court reasoned that the ITAT's order under challenge was one that restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. Given that over three and a half years had elapsed since the ITAT's order rejecting the reference application (dated November 19, 1998), the High Court found no justification in entertaining the present reference application. The Court opined that if the Assessing Officer had already decided the matter in the interim, the aggrieved party would have pursued appropriate remedies. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by directing the ITAT to refer the question of law for the opinion of the High Court at this stage. The application was accordingly dismissed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessee was entitled to depreciation in respect of plant not used for business purposes but used for trial in connection with research and development? Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The revenue sought a reference on the above question of law. The ITAT rejected the reference application on the ground that its order merely restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, and that no useful purpose would be served by entertaining the reference application after a significant delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

INCOME TAX APPLICATION No 300 of 1999

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH and Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ

============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements?

2.

To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement?

4.

Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?

5.

Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribun

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 →