COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MOHMEDHUSAIN JAMALBHAI

ITR/190/1989HC GujaratGJHC24012970198904 October 2001Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT S. SHAH,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to answer the question referred in these references. The Court noted that in a similar case, Income Tax Reference No. 202 of 1986 concerning Shri Faridahmed Abdulsameed, the Court had previously declined to answer the question raised due to unclear facts. In light of this precedent, the High Court decided not to answer the question presented in the current references. The references were disposed of without any order as to costs. No specific finding was reached on the merits of whether the profit share belonged to the trust or the individual assessee, as the Court did not delve into the factual matrix.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns Income Tax Reference Nos. 190 and 192 of 1989 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The references were made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench "B". The assessee is Mohmedhusain Jambhalbhai, and the revenue is the Commissioner of Income Tax. The core issue revolves around the taxability of a share of profit from the K.S. Lokhandwala Family Trust. The Tribunal had previously held, in a similar case, that such profit shares belonged to the trust and not the individual assessee, thus not includible in the individual assessment. The present references sought to confirm this view.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in confirming the view taken by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the share of profit from the K.S. Lokhandwala Family Trust belonged to the trust and not the assessee individual, and hence could not be included in the individual assessment of the assessee? (Question of law and fact, concerning the determination of beneficial ownership for tax purposes). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued, and the lower authorities agreed, that the share of profit from the trust was taxable in the hands of the trust itself, not the individual assessee. The Tribunal relied on its own prior decision in the case of Shri Faridahmed Abdulsameed. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the Commissioner of Income Tax, sought to challenge the Tribunal's confirmation of the lower appellate authority's decision, implying that the profit share should have been taxed in the hands of the individual assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 256(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 190 of 1989 WITH INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 192 of 1989

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH 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

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(2)

All 253 judgments and leading authorities on Section 256(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →