HIREN KIRAN JAGRUTI HINA TRUST vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers

ITR/293/1984HC GujaratGJHC24011958198419 January 2000Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE J.N.BHATT,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.BUCH2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Gujarat, in its oral judgment, noted that the assessee had not appeared despite being served with notice. The Court observed that the assessee might not be interested in obtaining a judicial opinion on the referred question. Given the absence of the assessee and their inability to provide assistance, coupled with the significant age of the reference (approximately 16 years), the Court expressed helplessness in dealing with the matter. Consequently, the Court decided that the reference deserved rejection in default. The reference was disposed of as not answered, meaning the Court did not provide an opinion on the merits of the question referred.

What were the facts?

This case involves an Income Tax Reference filed by the assessee, Hiren Kiran Jagruti Hina Trust, before the High Court of Gujarat. The reference was made at the instance of the assessee following a decision by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The matter was listed for hearing on January 19, 2000. Despite notice being served on the assessee, no one appeared on their behalf. The learned counsel for the respondent, Commissioner of Income Tax, was present. The reference is noted as being very old, approximately 16 years.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has correctly interpreted the implications of the resolutions of the trustees vis-à-vis the legal effect on income which had not accrued on the date of such determination? The assessee, by referring this question, presumably argued that the Tribunal's interpretation of the trustee resolutions and their impact on unaccrued income was incorrect. The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, would have contended that the Tribunal's interpretation was indeed correct. No specific authorities or precedents were mentioned in the judgment for either side's arguments.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 293 of 1984

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.N.BHATT and

MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH

============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements?

To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement?

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?

Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- HIREN KIRAN JAGRUTI HINA TRUST Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: NOTICE SERVED for Petitioner MR BB NAIK WITH MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1

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

CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.N.BHATT and MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH Date of decision: 19/01/2000

ORAL JUDGEMENT(Per J.N.Bhatt, J.) When the matter was called out, again, today, none

appeared for and on behalf of the applicant, whereas, learned counsel Mr B.B.Naik for the respondent was present. For our opinion, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, at the instance of the assessee company:

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has correctly interpreted the implications of the resolutions of the trustees vis. a. vis. the legal effect on income which had not accrued on the date of such determination ?"

It is reported by the Office that notice has already been served on the assessee. Despite that, it chose not to appear and assist the Court, presumably, because the assessee may not, now, be inquisitive to have a judicial opinion of this Court, upon the question referred to, at its instance.

Again, this reference is very old and is almost as old as 16 years. In the circumstances, this Court has to raise its hands in helplessness from dealing with the reference sent to us for our opinion in absence of the assessee's appearance and assistance, if not apathy or indifference.

In the result, the reference deserves the only fate of rejection in default. Accordingly, the reference shall stand disposed of as not answered.

....

(vjn)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →