COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.MEERA JOSEPH,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court acknowledged that the substantive issue of whether a partially constructed building is includible in wealth tax computation has been settled in favour of the Revenue by the Supreme Court in Giridhar G. Yadalam v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax and Another. However, the Court noted that the appeals were filed when the Wealth Tax Act was in force, and the departmental instructions (Annexure-D) prescribed a monetary limit of Rs. 4 lakhs for appeals under Section 260A. While the total demand exceeded Rs. 6 lakhs, the Court considered the assessee's death in 2010, the issuance of refund orders by the Tribunal, and the fact that the demand was below the Rs. 50 Lakhs limit stipulated in a subsequent litigation policy. Therefore, despite the legal issue being decided in favour of the Revenue, the Court closed the appeals without directing recovery, deeming them not maintainable based on the monetary limits in place at the time of filing. No costs were awarded.
What were the facts?
These consolidated Wealth Tax Appeals (WTAs) were filed by the Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Kottayam, against orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench, dated November 17, 2006. The appeals concerned the assessment years not explicitly stated but related to the ITAT's orders. The dispute revolved around whether a partially constructed building should be included in wealth tax computation. The assessee, Smt. Meera Jacob, passed away in 2010. The appeals were filed when the Wealth Tax Act was in force. The revenue contended that the appeals should be maintained based on a Supreme Court decision, while the assessee argued that the appeals were not maintainable due to monetary limits prescribed by departmental instructions.
What were the issues?
1. Whether a partially constructed building is includible in the computation of wealth tax (a question of law turning on the interpretation of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957). The Revenue argued that the Supreme Court in Giridhar G. Yadalam v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax and Another (2016) 384 ITR 52 (SC) held that partially constructed buildings must be included in wealth tax computation. The Assessee argued that the appeals were not maintainable as per departmental instructions (Annexure-D) which prescribed a monetary limit of Rs. 4 lakhs for filing appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that the total liability in these assessment years was slightly above Rs. 6 lakhs. The Revenue countered by referring to paragraph 3 of the circular, which allows appeals to be considered on merits if they involve a substantial question of law of importance and arise repeatedly, and also pointed to a subsequent litigation policy restricting appeals below Rs. 50 Lakhs.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WTA.No. 105 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WTA NO. 37(COCH)/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 17-11-2006 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SC FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: 1 SMT. MEERA JACOB, (DIED) THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM, KOTTAYAM. ADDL.R2 ELIZEBETH MATHEW, THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686 004. (ADDL R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30.10.2018 IN IA NO 2/2017 IN WTA NO.105/2009)
WTA 105/09&conn. -2- ADDL.R3 SMT.SUSAN CHERIAN, 23, CHAT SWORCH QUADRANT, MELBOURN, AUSTRALIA. (ADDL R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26/11/2018 IN WTA NO.105/2009) BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) FOR ADDL.R2 SRI.PAUL JACOB (P) OTHER PRESENT: SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS SR COUNSEL,SRI.PAUL JACOB , SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WEALTH TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.02.2019, ALONG WITH WEALTH TAX APPEAL NOS.107, 138, 143, 164, 167 & 183 of 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WTA 105/09&conn. -3- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WTA.No. 107 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WTA NO.38(COCH)/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 17-11-2006 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SC FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: 1 SMT. MEERA JACOB, (DIED) THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM, KOTTAYAM. ADDL.R2 ELIZEBETH MATHEW, THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 004 (ADDL R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30.10.2018 IN IA NO 2/2017 IN WTA NO 107/2009)
WTA 105/09&conn. -4- ADDL R3 SUSAN CHERIAN, 23, CHAT SWORCH QUADRANT, MELBOURN, AUSTRALIA (ADDL R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26.11.2018 IN WTA NO 107/2009) BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) FOR ADDL.R2 SRI.GEORGE A.CHERIAN SRI.PAUL JACOB THIS WEALTH TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.02.2019, ALONG WITH WTA.105/2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WTA 105/09&conn. -5- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WTA.No. 138 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WTA 40(COCH)/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 17-11-2006 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: 1 SMT.MEERA JACOB, THUNDIYIL HOUSE, (DIED) THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM, KOTTYAM. ADDL.R2 ELIZEBETH MATHEW THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 004. (ADDL R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30.10.2018 IN IA NO. 2/2017 IN WTA NO.138/2009)
WTA 105/09&conn. -6- ADDL .R3 SUSAN CHERIAN, 23, CHAT SWORCH QUADRANT, MELBOURN, AUSTRALIA (ADDL R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26.11.2018 IN WTA NO 138/2009) BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) FOR ADDL.R2 SRI.LEO LUKOSE SRI.PAUL JACOB THIS WEALTH TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.02.2019, ALONG WITH WTA.105/2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WTA 105/09&conn. -7- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WTA.No. 143 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WTA 41(COCH)/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 17-11-2006 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOTTAYAM KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: 1 SMT.MEERA JOSEPH, (DIED) THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM,, KOTTAYAM. ADDL. R2 ELIZEBETH MATHEW THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686 004 ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30/10/2018 IN IA NO. 2/2017 IN WTA NO. 143/2009
WTA 105/09&conn. -8- ADDL.R3 SUSAN CHERIAN 23, CHAT SWORCH QUADRANT, MELBOURN, AUSTRALIA ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26.11.2018 IN WTA NO. 143/2009. BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) FOR ADDL.R2 SRI.GEORGE A.CHERIAN SRI.PAUL JACOB THIS WEALTH TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.02.2019, ALONG WITH WTA.105/2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WTA 105/09&conn. -9- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WTA.No. 164 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WTA 35(COCH)/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 17-11-2006 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SC FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: 1 SMT. MEERA JACOB (DIED) THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM,, KOTTAYAM. ADDL.R2 ELIZEBETH MATHEW THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 004. (ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30/10/18 IN IA NO. 2/2017 IN WTA NO. 164/2009)
WTA 105/09&conn. -10- ADDL.R3 SMT. SUSAN CHERIAN 23, CHAT SWORCH QUADRANT, MELBOURN, AUSTRALIA (ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PR ORDER DATED 26.11.2018 IN WTA NO. 164/2009) BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) FOR ADDL.R2 SRI.RONY JOSE SRI.PAUL JACOB THIS WEALTH TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.02.2019, ALONG WITH WTA.105/2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WTA 105/09&conn. -11- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WTA.No. 167 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OTHERS 39(COCH)/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 17-11-2006 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SC FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: 1 SMT.MEERA JACOB, (DIED) THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM, KOTTAYAM. ADDL.R2 ELIZEBETH MATHEW THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 004. ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30/10/18 IN IA NO. 2/2017 IN WTA NO. 167/2009
WTA 105/09&conn. -12- ADDL.R3 SMT. SUSAN CHERIAN 23, CHAT SWORCH QUADRANT, MELBOURN, AUSTRALIA (ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26/11/2018 IN WTA NO. 167/2009) BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) FOR ADDL.R2 SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB SMT.NISHA JOHN SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL SRI.PAUL JACOB (P) SRI.ROSHEN.D.ALEXANDER THIS WEALTH TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.02.2019, ALONG WITH WTA.105/2009 AND CONNECTED, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WTA 105/09&conn. -13- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WTA.No. 183 of 2009 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WTA 36(COCH)/2006 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 17-11-2006 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SC FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: 1 SMT. MEERA JACOB, THUNDIYIL HOUSE, (DIED) THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM,, KOTTAYAM. ADDL. R2 SMT.ELIZABETH MATHEW, THUNDIYIL HOUSE, MUTTAMBALAM P.O, KOTTAYAM-686 004. ADDL. R3 SMT. SUSAN CHERIAN, 23,CHAT SWORCH QUADRANT, MELBOURN, AUSTRALIA. (ADDL. R2 AND R3 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 15-2-2019 IN IA NO. 2250/17 IN WTA NO. 183/2009.) BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) FOR ADDL.R2 SRI.PAUL JACOB SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL THIS WEALTH TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.02.2019, ALONG WITH WTA.105/2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WTA 105/09&conn. -14- Wealth Tax Appeal Nos.105, 107, 138, 143, 164, 167 & 183 of 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of February, 2019 J U D G M E N T Vinod Chandran, J. Sri. Bechu Kurian Thomas, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second additional respondent submits that even as per the instructions of the Department as existing at the point of filing of the appeals, as revealed from Annexure-D, these appeals could not have been maintained. The learned Standing Counsel, Government of India (Taxes) points to a subsequent Supreme Court decision in 2016) 384 ITR 52 (SC) [Giridhar G.Yadalam v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax and Another] and submits that the issue raised herein is covered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The issue arising in the appeal was as to whether a partially constructed building should be assessed to wealth tax or not. The Honourable Supreme Court in the above mentioned decision has categorically held that partially constructed buildings also have to be included in the computation of wealth tax.
WTA 105/09&conn. -15- 2. We are however concerned with the circular as produced at Annexure-D which provides a monetary limit of Rs.4 lakhs for appeals to be filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This also applies to individual appeals and not to collective demands in various assessment years. Individual appeals raise a far lesser amount, but however, the learned Senior Counsel admits that the total liability would be slightly above Rs.6 lakhs in all these assessment years. The learned Standing Counsel for Government of India (Taxes) points to paragraph 3 of the Circular, where there is a discretion reserved on the authorities to decide whether the appeal has to be considered on merits without being hindered by the monetary limits if it involves a substantial question of law of importance and such question arises repeatedly. As we noticed, the question of law has now been settled by the Honourable Supreme Court. Repeated instances of such question of law arising does not arise at all, since the Wealth Tax Act is no more in force. We also notice the extant litigation policy which restrains the Department from taking up any appeal under Section
WTA 105/09&conn. -16- 260A; if the demand is less than Rupees Fifty Lakhs. In such circumstances, considering the overall circumstances of the assessee having expired in the year 2010, the refund orders as per the order of the Tribunal having been issued, and also that the monetary limit is less than that prescribed under Annexure-D circular, we are of the opinion that though the question of law has to be answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee, there need be no recovery steps taken for reason of the appeals being below the monetary limit at the time of filing of the appeals itself. These appeals are hence closed with the above observations. No order as to costs. Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE
WTA 105/09&conn. -17- APPENDIX OF WTA 105/2009 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 16(3) R.W.S 17 DATED 27.3.2002 ANNEXURE B COPY OF CIT(A) ORDER IN WTA NOS 23 TO 29/K/CIT-IV/02-03 DATED 12.1.2004 ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN WTA NO 35 T0 41/COCH/2006 DATED 17.11.2006 ANNEXURE D COPY OF CBDTS INSTRUCTION NO.2 OF 2005 DATED 24.10.2005 ANNEXURE E COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF THE NOTICE SENT TO THE RESPONDENT THROUGH E-MAIL [True Copy] jg
WTA 105/09&conn. -18- APPENDIX OF WTA 107/2009 APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 16(3) R.W.S 17 DATED 27.3.2002 ANNEXURE B COPY OF CIT (A) ORDER IN WTA NOS 23 TO 29/K/CIT-IV/02-03 DATED 12.1.2004 ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN WTA NO.35 TO 41/COCH/2006 DATED 17.11.2006 ANNEXURE D COPY OF CBDT'S INSTRUCTION NO 2 OF 2005 DATED 24.10.2005 ANNEXURE E COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF THE NOTICE SENT TO THE RESPONDENT THOUGH E-MAIL [True Copy] jg
WTA 105/09&conn. -19- APPENDIX OF WTA 138/2009 APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 16(3) R.W.S. 17 DATED 27.3.2002 ANNEXURE B CIT (A) ORDER IN WTA NOS. 23 TO 29/K/CIT-IV/02-03 DATED 12.1.2005 ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN WTA NO 35 TO 41/COCH/2006 DATED 17.11.2006. ANNEXURE D COPY OF CBDTS INSTRUCTION NO 2 OF 2005 DATED 24.10.2005 ANNEXURE E COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF THE NOTICE SENT TO THE ADDL 3RD RESPONDENT THROUGH E-MAIL [True Copy] jg
WTA 105/09&conn. -20- APPENDIX OF WTA 143/2009 APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 16(3) R.W.S. 17 DT. 27.03.2002 ANNEXURE B CIT(A) ORDER IN WTA NOS 23 TO 29 /K/CIT-IV/02-03 DT. 12.01.2005 ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN WTA NO. 35 TO 41/COCH/2006 DATED 17.11.2006 ANNEXURE D COPY OF CBDT'S INSTRUCTION NO.2 OF 2005 DATED 24.10.2005 ANNEXURE E COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF THE NOTICE SENT TO THE RESPONDENT THROUGH E-MAIL. [True Copy] jg
WTA 105/09&conn. -21- APPENDIX OF WTA 164/2009 APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 16(3) R.W.S. 17 DT. 27.03.2002 ANNEXURE B CIT(A) ORDER IN WTA NOS. 23 TO 29/K/CIT-IV/02.03 DT. 12.01.2005 ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN WTA NO. 31 TO 41/COCH/2006 DATED 17.11.2006 ANNEXURE D COPY OF CBDT'S INSTRUCTION NO.2 OF 2005 DATED 24.10.2005 ANNEXURE E COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF THE NOTICE SENT TO THE RESPONDENT THROUGH E-MAIL. [True Copy] jg
WTA 105/09&conn. -22- APPENDIX OF WTA 167/2009 APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 16(3) R.W.S. 17 DT. 27.03.2002 . ANNEXURE B CIT(A) ORDER IN WTA NOS. 23 TO 29/K/CIT-IV/02.03 DT. 12.01.2005. ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN WTA NO. 35 TO 41/COCH/2006 DATED 17.11.2006 ANNEXURE D COPY OF CBDT'S INSTRUCTION NO. 2 OF 2005 DATED 24.10.2005 ANNEXURE E COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF THE NOTICE SENT TO THE RESPONDENT THROUGH E MAIL. [True Copy] jg
WTA 105/09&conn. -23- APPENDIX OF WTA 183/2009 APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 16(3) R.W.S. 17 DT. 27.03.2002 ANNEXURE B CIT(A) ORDER IN WTA NOS. 23 TO 29/K/CIT-IV/02-03 DATED 12.1.2005. ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN WTA NO. 35 TO 41/COCH/2006 DATED 17.11.2006 ANNEXURE D COPY OF CBDT'S INSTRUCTION NO. 2 OF 2005 DATED 24.10.2005 [True Copy] jg
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
