COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. DEEPAK J PANCHAL HEIR OF J S PANCHAL

PDF · subscribers
ITR/176/1986HC GujaratGJHC24010800198603 July 2001Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Gujarat, per Mr. Justice A.R. Dave and Mr. Justice D.A. Mehta, answered the referred question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The Court's decision was based on the submission by both learned advocates that the issue involved in the reference had already been decided by the High Court itself in the case of CIT v. Bhagwat Prasad P. Parikh, reported in 239 ITR 645. Therefore, following the law laid down in the aforementioned precedent, the Court found the assessee entitled to the deduction under Section 80U. The reference was disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs. No issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

This case involves an Income Tax Reference filed by the revenue at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The reference was made to the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee is Deepak J Panchal, heir of J S Panchal. The specific assessment year(s) are not recorded in the judgment. The dispute centers on the assessee's entitlement to a deduction under Section 80U of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled in law to the deduction under Section 80U of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as claimed? (Question of law). The revenue, represented by Shri B.B. Naik, contended that the issue had been decided in the case of CIT v. Bhagwat Prasad P. Parikh, 239 ITR 645. The assessee, represented by Shri N.R. Divetia, implicitly agreed with this submission by not presenting a contrary argument. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the assessee beyond the implication of relying on the precedent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 256(1),Section 80U

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 176 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 @ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus DEEPAK J PANCHAL HEIR OF J S PANCHAL -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR BB NAIK for MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner No. 1 MR NR DIVETIA for Respondent No. 1

CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE and MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA

Date of decision: 03/07/2001

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

At the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred to this Court for its opinion by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench 'A' under the provisions of sec. 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled in law to the deduction u/s 80U of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as claimed?"

2.

Learned advocate Shri B.B. Naik has appeared for the applicant-revenue and learned advocate Shri N.R. Divetia has appeared for the respondent-assessee.

3.

It has been submitted by the learned advocates that the issue involved in the present reference has already been decided in the case of CIT v. Bhagwat Prasad P. Parikh, 239 ITR 645. In view of the law laid down by this court in Bhagwat Prasad P. Parikh (supra), we answer the question in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

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

(A.R. Dave, J.)

(D.A. Mehta, J.) (hn)

More judgments on Section 256(1)

All 755 judgments and leading authorities on Section 256(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →