MURUBHAI RAMJIBHAI & ORS vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITR/160/1986HC GujaratGJHC24010784198610 July 2001Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What were the facts?

This case involves a reference made to the High Court of Gujarat under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the applicant assessees. Although there were 14 different assessees, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) forwarded a single, common statement of the case. The High Court noted that separate statements for each assessee should have been provided due to potential factual differences. The hearing was scheduled, but no one appeared on behalf of the applicant assessees.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to answer the question referred to it. The reasoning was based on the absence of the applicant assessee, who had initiated the reference. The Court stated that in such circumstances, where the applicant does not appear, it is not possible to answer the referred question. Consequently, the Reference was returned unanswered. The Court also made an observation regarding the ITAT's practice of forwarding a common statement of case for multiple assessees, suggesting that separate statements should be provided in the future to account for differing facts. No order as to costs was made.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should answer a question of law referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, when the applicant assessee fails to appear. The assessee's contention is not recorded as they did not appear. The revenue's contention is also not recorded. The High Court is faced with the procedural issue of proceeding with a reference when the party initiating it is absent.

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 REFERENCE No 160 of 1986

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE and Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA ============================================================ 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 Civil Judge? : NO -------

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 →