| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 263 1998 SLD 263 1998 PTD 2130 (1998) 229 ITR 120 (2000) 81 TAX 22 |
Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeal No. 1745 of 1984, decision dated: 2-04-1997
K. S. PARIPOORNAN AND S. SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ
T.C. Sharma and B.K. Prasad, Advocates for Appellant. S. Ganesh and Ms. A.K. Verma, Advocates for JBD & Co. for
Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1745 of 1984, decision dated: 2-04-1997
K. S. PARIPOORNAN AND S. SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ
T.C. Sharma and B.K. Prasad, Advocates for Appellant. S. Ganesh and Ms. A.K. Verma, Advocates for JBD & Co. for
Respondents
COMMISSIONER OF IncomE tax
VS
SERCON (PVT.) LTD
Law: Income Tax Act, 1961
Section: 261
Income-tax----Appeal to Supreme Court---Practice---Statement of case and order of Tribunal should form part of paper book---Supreme Court Registry should insist on production of such documents---Time allowed to Revenue to produce said documents---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.261. In all the income-tax and allied tax matters which come up before the Supreme Court, it is essential for the appellant or the petitioner, as the case may be, to file the order rendered by the Appellate Tribunal in the appeal and also the statement of the case in cases where such a statement of the case is drawn up. The registry of the Supreme Court should insist that in all tax matters coming to Supreme Court ultimately on a reference, the order passed by the Tribunal in the appeal and also the statement of the case should be produced by the appellant or the petitioner. In case the appellant or the petitioner has not produced it and if the respondent has with him such records, the registry may in appropriate cases direct him to produce the same. [In the instant case the Supreme Court allowed time to the Revenue to file the order of the Tribunal and also the statement of case, though the appeal was filed 13 years ago]. JUDGMENT The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question of law for the decision of the High Court of Gujarat (see (1982) 136 ITR 881, 883): "Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the land in question bearing final Plot No.522-C sold by the assessee was not agricultural land and that the excess of Rs.10,65,243 was liable to be taxed as capital gains even when the plot in question at the time of its sale was entered in the Government Revenue Records as agricultural land?" It is evident that the Appellate . Tribunal held that the land in question is not agricultural land. But the High Court has taken a different view and has held that the Tribunal erred in holding that the land sold by the assessee-the subject-matter of this proceeding-is not agricultural land. In order to decide the matter fairly and satisfactorily the appellate order passed by the Tribunal is a necessary document. So also in all the decisions rendered by the High…
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