NATVERLAL GAFURBHAI PATEL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WTR/28/1991HC GujaratGJHC24013698199121 December 2002Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Gujarat, in its judgment dated 21.12.2002, answered the question of law in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. This decision was based on a prior judgment of the same court in an identical matter, Wealth Tax Reference No. 34 of 1991, which had also been decided in favour of the assessee. The ratio decidendi is that the National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980, are eligible for exemption under Section 5(1)(xvia) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The reference was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs. No issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

This case involves a Wealth Tax Reference No. 28 of 1991 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The reference arises from an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C'. The assessee, Natverlal Gafurbhai Patel, sought a reference to the High Court on a question of law concerning exemption under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, was the respondent. The specific asset in dispute was National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980. The High Court noted that an identical question had been raised in Wealth Tax Reference No. 34 of 1991, which had already been decided by the court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the exemption under section 5(1)(xvia) in respect of the National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980? This is a question of law turning on the interpretation of Section 5(1)(xvia) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that they were entitled to the exemption under the specified section for the National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue. However, by implication, the revenue would have contended against the assessee's claim for exemption.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 27(1),Section 5(1)(xvia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

WEALTH TAX REFERENCE No 28 of 1991

For Approval and Signature:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE and HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.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?

-------------------------------------------------------------- NATVERLAL GAFURBHAI PATEL Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. WEALTH TAX REFERENCE No. 28 of 1991 MR JP SHAH for Petitioner No. 1 MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1

--------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE and HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.MEHTA

Date of decision: 21/12/2002

ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE)

At the instance of the assessee, the following question of law, arising out of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', has been referred to this court for its opinion under the provisions of sec. 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the exemption under sec. 5(1)(xvia) in respect of the National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980?"

2.

The question raised in this reference has also been raised in Wealth Tax Reference No. 34 of 1991. This court has disposed of the said reference by answering the question in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by its judgment dated 21.12.2002. The question referred to this court in this reference is also, therefore, answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

The reference stands disposed of with no order as to costs.

(A.R. Dave, J.)

(K.M. Mehta, J.) (hn)

More judgments on Section 27(1)

All 322 judgments and leading authorities on Section 27(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →