COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX vs. SABARMATI INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITR/33/1992HC GujaratGJHC24015384199213 August 2003Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court answered the question of law in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. This decision was based on the fact that the issue raised in the reference was concluded by the High Court's own earlier judgment dated 25-06-2003 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Koshalya Investment P. Ltd. The Tribunal's impugned order had relied on its own decision in the case of Kaushalya Investment P. Ltd., which was subsequently affirmed by the High Court. Therefore, the Tribunal was held to be right in cancelling the interest charged under Section 201 of the Income Tax Act.

What were the facts?

This is an Income Tax Reference filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat-II, Ahmedabad, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A'. The reference pertains to Assessment Year 1982-83. The question of law for the opinion of the High Court concerns the cancellation of interest charged under Section 201 of the Income Tax Act. Both the revenue and the assessee jointly requested the High Court to hear and dispose of the matter, acknowledging that the controversy was concluded by a prior decision of the same High Court. The Tribunal's impugned order had relied on its own decision in the case of Kaushalya Investment P. Ltd., which was subsequently decided by the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in cancelling the interest charged u/s. 201 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 question is answered in favour of the assessee implies their agreement with the Tribunal's decision to cancel the interest. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the Commissioner of Income Tax, sought to challenge the Tribunal's order cancelling the interest charged under Section 201. The reference itself indicates the revenue's disagreement with the Tribunal's finding.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 33 of 1992

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA 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 concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals?

-------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX Versus SABARMATI INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD. -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 33 of 1992 MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner No. 1 MR KC PATEL for Respondent No. 1 --------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA and MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA

Date of decision: 13/08/2003

ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per : MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)

1.

This is a reference made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A' at the instance

of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat-II, Ahmedabad raising the following question of law for the opinion of this Court :

"Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in cancelling the interest charged u/s. 201 of the I.T. Act ?"

2.

When the matter was called out Mr.M.R.Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for the Income Tax Department and Mr.R.K.Patel respectively appearing for the applicant and the respondent have made a joint request that since the controversy brought by way of this reference stands concluded, the matter may be taken up for hearing and disposed off by this bench despite the fact that one of us (D.A.Mehta, J) had appeared before the Tribunal in reference proceedings.

3.

The Assessment Year is 1982-83. It is common ground between the parties that the question referred to this Court is concluded by the decision of this Court rendered on 25-06-2003 in Income Tax Reference No.223 of 1991 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Koshalya Investment P. Ltd. IVL. The Tribunal in the impugned order has relied upon its own decision in the case of Kaushalya Investment P. Ltd. which has since been decided vide the aforesaid judgement dated 25-06-2003. 4. In light of the aforesaid fact situation the question referred to us is answered in affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

5.

The reference thus stands disposed off accordingly with no order as to costs. [D.H.WAGHELA, J] [D.A.MEHTA, J] 'Bhavesh'

More judgments on Section 201

All 1,566 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →