TEK RAM(D) THR.LRS. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD
What did the Supreme Court hold?
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and remanded the matter back for a fresh disposal. The High Court is to consider the newly filed documents before making its decision.
What were the facts?
The appellants filed additional documents before the Supreme Court that were not presented to the High Court. The Supreme Court found these documents to be relevant for the appeal's determination.
What were the issues?
Whether newly submitted documents are relevant and should be considered by the High Court for the disposal of the appeal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cited by 44 judgments on BharatTax
See all citing judgments →Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.
- Vinay Mittal, Sriganganagar v. ITO, Ward-1, SriganganagarJodhpur · 2026-02-26
- Dnyanyogi Foundation Sangli, Sangli v. CIT- Exemption, PunePune · 2025-11-21
- Dnyanyogi Foundation Sangli, Sangli v. CIT-Exemption, PunePune · 2025-11-21
- Ms. Zinki Ashish Jain, Mumbai v. Income Tax Officer -41(3)4, MumbaiMumbai · 2025-09-30
- Sher Singh, Sangrur v. Income Tax Officer, SangrurChandigarh · 2025-09-22
Page 1 JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6262 OF 2013 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(C) NO. 4876 OF 2012) TEK RAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS ... APPELLANTS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD ... RESPONDENT O R D E R 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in I.T.A.No.109 of 2005, dated 23.11.2010. 3. This Court, while issuing notice to the respondent, by its order dated 03.02.2012, had passed the following order: “....... Issue notice as to why the matter should not be sent back to the High Court as, today, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before us number of documents which earlier were not placed before the High Court.” 4. In our opinion, the documents, which the appellants have now filed before this Court are of some relevance and those documents should be looked into by the High Court before it comes to a conclusion whether the appeal requires to be allowed or to be rejected.
Page 2 JUDGMENT : 2 : 5. Taking that view of the matter, we set aside the order passed by the High Court and remand the matter back to the High Court for fresh disposal of I.T.A.No.109 of 2005, after accepting the documents that were/may be filed by the appellants. 6. With these observations, the Civil Appeal is disposed of. No costs. 7. All the contentions of both the parties are left open. Ordered accordingly. ...................J. (H.L. DATTU) ...................J. (M.Y. EQBAL) NEW DELHI; AUGUST 05, 2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026