RATAN DEVI vs. C.I.T

PDF · subscribers
ITR/19/1989HC RajasthanRJHC02005568198917 February 2009Author: GANDHI R C,MOHAMMAD RAFIQ2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had remanded the matter to the Income-tax Commissioner for disposal. It was also observed that the remand order might have been considered and disposed of by the Income-tax Commissioner. Crucially, the counsel for the Assessee was not present to press and argue the Reference, indicating a loss of interest. Consequently, the High Court decided not to answer the questions of law posed in the Reference. No specific finding was given on the merits of the two questions of law. The operative direction was to send the Reference back unanswered.

What were the facts?

This is an Income Tax Reference filed by Smt. Rattandevi Dugar (the Assessee) against the Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur (the Revenue), for the assessment year 1980-81. The reference was made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) at the instance of the Assessee under Section 256(1)/256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur, heard the matter. The Assessee's counsel was absent, and the Revenue was represented. The ITAT had previously remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide two questions of law, framed at the instance of the Assessee: 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in directing a fresh enquiry, including cross-examination and the production of loose documents marked 'EE', which were allegedly never produced. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in restoring the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Assessee's contentions were not recorded as their counsel was absent. The Revenue's counsel was present. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by either side regarding the merits of the questions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 256(1),Section 256(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
DBITR NO.19/89. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR.

D.B. INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.19/1989. Smt.Rattandevi Dugar Vs. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur. Date of Order:- February 17, 2009. P R E S E N T HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF SHRI R.C. GANDHI HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ None present for the Assessee. Mr. Anuroop Singhi for the Revenue. ***** BY THE COURT:- This Reference has been made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Assessee under Section 256(1)/256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to the assessment year 1980-81 seeking opinion of this Court on the following questions of law:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in directing for a fresh enquiry in the nature of cross examination, loose documents Exbt. 'EE' which were never produced etc.?

DBITR NO.19/89. 2

2.

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in restoring the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication?” 2) Heard learned counsel for the Revenue. 3) The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has remanded the matter to the Income-tax Commissioner for disposal and it appears that remand order might have been considered and disposed of by the Income-tax Commissioner. We also find that counsel for the Assessee is not coming forward to press and argue the Reference as he has lost his interest. Therefore, the Reference is sent back un-answered. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J. (R.C. GANDHI),Actg.CJ. anil

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 →