Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 2606 2008 SLD 2606 (2008) 306 ITR 271 (2008) 172 TAXMAN 107
Delhi High Court

MADAN B. LOKUR AND V.B. GUPTA, 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


Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411

Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435

Law:

Section:

2008] 306 ITR 271 . [2008] 172 TAXMAN 107 (DELHI) HIGH COURT OF DELHI DLF Universal Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax MADAN B. LOKUR AND V.B. GUPTA, JJ. IT APPEAL NO. 854 OF 2007 JANUARY 11, 2008 Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment year 1992-93 - Whether when one Bench of Tribunal takes a view, then another Bench of Tribunal cannot pass a contrary order, but must, if it disagrees with that view, have conflict resolved by referring matter to a Larger Bench - Held, yes FACTS While completing the assessment of the assessee-company, the Assessing Officer made certain addition on account of the revaluation of the stock-in-trade of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the addition. On second appeal, the assessee submitted before the Tribunal that an identical issue had arisen in the case of the assessee, though in respect of a different amount for the assessment year 1985-86 and the Tribunal had decided same in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal, however, rejected the assessee's contention on the grounds that the Commissioner had taken into consideration an amendment to section 45(3) which came into force from 1-4-1988 and, therefore, was not applicable in respect of the assessment year 1985-86; that some of the decisions cited were not cited on earlier occasion; and that the issue was sensitive and was not deliberated upon by the Tribunal on the earlier occasion. The Tribunal, thus, declined to follow the order passed in respect of the assessment year 1985-86. On further appeal : HELD It is now well-settled that when one Bench of the Tribunal takes a view, then another Bench of the Tribunal cannot pass a contrary order, but must, if it disagrees with that view, have the conflict resolved by referring the matter to a Larger Bench. This is not only a matter of judicial propriety, but also of judicial discipline. [Para 9] Therefore, the matter was to be remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration in accordance with the law. CASES REFERRED TO Union of India v. Shri P.D. Sharma 2004 III AD (Delhi) 131 [Para 10], Sundarjas Kanyalal Bhatija v.Collector, Thane [1989] 3 SCC 396 [Para 10], Mahadeolal…
🔒
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