M/S.JAYANTI PAPER MILLS LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers

ITR/42/1983HC GujaratGJHC24011515198316 August 1996Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.J.PANDYA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.PANDIT2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since the assessee, who had made the Reference from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, failed to appear or take any steps to prosecute the reference despite being served with a notice, the reference was disposed of for want of prosecution. The court noted that the paper book had not been prepared, indicating the assessee's lack of intent to pursue the matter. The operative direction was to dismiss the reference on this procedural ground. No decision was made on the merits of any substantive issue that might have been raised in the original appeal before the ITAT.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) made a Reference to the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad on or about January 12, 1983. The O.J. Department issued a notice to the assessee, M/s. Jayanti Paper Mills Ltd., on March 22, 1983, by registered post, which was received by the assessee on March 28, 1983. Despite receiving the notice, the assessee did not file any appearance or take any steps to pursue the reference further. The paper book was also not prepared. Consequently, it became apparent that the assessee did not wish to prosecute the reference.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should proceed with an Income Tax Reference when the assessee, who initiated the reference, fails to appear or prosecute it. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning procedural rules of the High Court and the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee as they did not appear. The implicit position is that they are not pursuing the reference. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by Mihir Thakore with Manish R. Bhatt, would likely contend that the reference should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to the assessee's non-appearance and failure to take necessary steps, as per established procedural norms.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 42 of 1983 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.J.PANDYA and MR.JUSTICE S.D.PANDIT ============================================================ -------------------------------------------------------------- M/S.JAYANTI PAPER MILLS LTD Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: Petitioner served Mihir Thakore with Manish R.Bhatt for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.J.PANDYA and MR.JUSTICE S.D.PANDIT Date of decision: 16/08/96

ORAL JUDGMENT (N.J.Pandya,J.)

After receipt of the Reference from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by this Court on or about 12-1-1983, the O.J.Department had issued notices to the concerned parties. This being a Reference at the instance of the assessee, the Department as well as the Assessee also came to be informed. The notice thus came to be issued in this reference to the petitioner on 22nd March 1983 by registered post. This was sent by registered post postage pre-paid under Receipt No.3507 at Surat address of the assessee on 25-3-1983. This was received by the assessee as per original A.D. slip on 28-3-1983. Inspite of the receipt of the notice, no appearance is filed; nor any step has been taken for pursuing the reference any further. In fact, the paper book is also not prepared. It has become therefore

obvious that the assessee does not want to prosecute the Reference any further. It is, therefore, disposed of for want of prosecution.

******

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →