HY.FINANCIAL CORP.SECTOR 17 CH vs. CIT HY.ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITR/22/1998HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01037988199820 December 2007Author: MR JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh returned the questions of law as unanswered. The Court noted that the case had been adjourned on multiple occasions for the filing of the printed paper book. Even after granting a final opportunity with costs of Rs. 2500/-, the counsel for the assessee had not filed the order passed under Section 154 of the Act for rectification. Despite a further opportunity, the order dated 20.12.1988 passed under Section 154 was not produced. Consequently, the Court found it impossible to adjourn the case again and therefore, the questions referred were returned unanswered. No decision was made on the merits of the issues raised.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Haryana Financial Corporation, filed an Income Tax Reference (ITR) No. 22 of 1998 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The reference was made at the instance of the assessee under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking the Court's opinion on questions of law arising from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The case has faced multiple adjournments due to the assessee's failure to file the printed paper book and, crucially, the order passed under Section 154 of the Act for rectification. Despite being granted several opportunities, including a final one with costs, the assessee did not produce the necessary order dated 22.09.1989, nor the order dated 20.12.1988 passed under Section 154. The Court noted that it was not possible to adjourn the case further.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal was asked to decide the following questions of law: 1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the rectification under Section 154 when the matter was clearly debatable? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the interest charged against the provisions of Section 215/217? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee, through its counsel, failed to provide the order passed under Section 154 of the Act for rectification, which was crucial for the Court to examine the first issue. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee regarding the debatable nature of the rectification or the charging of interest under Sections 215/217. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 215,Section 217,Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I. T. R NO. 22 OF 1998 DECIDEDON : 20.12.2007 Haryana Financial Corporation ...Applicant versus Commissioner of Income Tax ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. S. K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the assessee. Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Advocate, for the revenue. M.M.KUMAR, J. At the instance of the assessee-petitioner, the Tribunal has entered an application under Section 256 (1) and has referred a following question of law for the opinion of this Court :-

1.

Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the rectifi- cation under Section 154 when the matter was clearly debatable ?

2.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the interest charged against the provisions of Section 215/217 ?

I. T. R NO. 22 OF 1998 -2- When the matter came up for consideration, the hearing has to be adjourned on number of occasions for the filing of printed paper book. Eventually, printed paper book was filed after we have granted one last opportunity, imposing costs of Rs. 2500/-. Even then, the counsel for the assessee has not filed the order passed under Section 154 of the Act for rectification. Again last opportunity was granted and the order now placed on record is order dated 22.09.1989 and still the order dated 20.12.1988 passed under Section 154 on the application of assessee, has not been produced. In view of the above, it is not possible for us to adjourn the case once again. Accordingly, the question is returned as unanswered. (M. M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) DECEMBER 20, 2007 JUDGE

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →