Case Details

Citation(s)
1986 SLG 1662 1986 SLD 1662 (1986) 159 ITR 746
Karnataka High Court
F.R. Nos. 3243 AND 6171 OF 1985 DECEMBER 13, 1985
K.S. PUTTASWAMY AND NARAYANA RAI KUDOOR, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Inspecting Assistant Commissioner

v.

N. Vajram Setty

Law:

Section:

Section 261 of the I ncome-tax Act, 1961 - Appeal to supreme court - General - Whether words 'any of high court delivered on a reference' occurring in section 261 comprehend an order made on an appeal under chapter XXA - Held, no Words and phrases - E xpression 'any of high court delivered on a reference' occurring in section 261 of the income-tax act, 1961 Facts On an application made under section 261, the petitioner sought for certificate of fitness to appeal to the Supreme Court against an order made on an appeal under Chapter XXA. The petitioner contended that the term 'any of the High Court delivered on a reference' occurring in section 261 comprehend an order made on an appeal under Chapter XXA and, thus, the petition was maintainable under section 261. Held Section 261 in very clear and unambiguous terms empowers a High Court to grant a certificate of fitness to appeal only on a reference made to the High Court under section 256. The scope and ambit of a reference under section 256 is entirely different from an appeal provided under Chapter XXA. The words 'on a reference made under section 256' occurring in section 261 cannot by any stretch of imagination be interpreted as an appeal made under Chapter XXA. The omission to include an order made under Chapter XXA is somewhat unintentional and is even strange. But that legislative omission could not be supplied by Courts. Thus, the petition was dismissed. Case referred to Keshava S. Jamkhandi v. Ramachandra S. Jamkhandi [1980] 2 KLJ 432 (FB). Editor's note On the assessee's oral application for certificates of fitness to appeal to the Supreme Court under articles 133 and 134A of the Constitution, the Court held that no substantial question of law of general importance arose from its decision in Income-tax Appeal Nos. 17 to 20 of 1976 which needed to be decided by the Supreme Court. K. Srinivasan, H. Raghavendra Rao and G. Sarangan for the Applicant. S.P. Bhat for the Respondent. ORDER Puttaswamy, J. - As the questions that arise for determination in these cases are common, we propose to dispose of them by a common order. 2. In these petitions made under section 261 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'),…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492