Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 168 2002 SLD 168 2002 PTD 1118 (2001) 251 ITR 882
Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeals Nos. 4158 to 4164 of 1994, decision dated: 6-12-2000
S. P. BHARUCHA, N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND Y. K. SABHARWAL, JJ
S. Ganesh, Rajiv Nanda, S.K. Dwivedi, T.C. Sharma, S.W.A. Quadri and Ms. Sushma Suri, Advocates for Appellant. L. Nageswara Rao, Senior Advocate (S.K. Verma and V.G. Pragasam, Advocates with him) for
Respondent

COMMISSIONER OF IncomE tax

VS

LAMI WINE MERCHANTS

Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 185,256

Income-tax----Reference---Question of law---Firm---Registration---Firm formed in contravention of liquor rules---Whether entitled to registration---Question of law---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss. 185 & 256---A. P. Foreign Liquor and Indian Liquor Rules, 1970, Rr. 38 & 39. The question whether, in spite of contravention of rules 38 and 39 of the A. P. Foreign Liquor and Indian Liquor Rules, 1970, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of registration under section 185 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is a question of law. The Supreme Court accordingly directed the Appellate Tribunal to state a case to the High Court and refer the question of law for opinion. Bhiari Lal Jaiswal v. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 746 (SC) and CIT v. Nall' Venkataramana (1984) 145 ITR 759 (AP) ref. ORDER The High Court declined to call for a reference of the following question: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to the benefits…
🔒
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