Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>High Court's Power: Stay of Tax Recovery Pending Disposal of References</h1> <h3>L. Bansi Dhar And Sons Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, New Delhi</h3> L. Bansi Dhar And Sons Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, New Delhi - [1978] 111 ITR 330, 1978 CTR 42 Issues Involved:1. Jurisdiction of the High Court to grant stay of tax recovery pending disposal of references.2. Merits of the application for stay of tax recovery.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Jurisdiction of the High Court to Grant Stay of Tax Recovery Pending Disposal of References:The primary issue for determination was whether the High Court, in a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has the jurisdiction to pass an order granting stay of recovery of tax pending the disposal of the references.The court analyzed the provisions of section 66(1) and section 256(1), which allow for a reference to the High Court on a question of law arising out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal. The court noted that the Acts do not contain any express provision empowering the High Court to grant stay of recovery of tax. Consequently, the assessee invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.The court referred to the decision of the Andhra High Court in Polisetti Narayana Rao v. Commissioner of Income-tax, which held that the High Court has inherent power under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and article 227 of the Constitution to order stay of recovery of tax pending the disposal of the reference. The court emphasized the inherent powers of a court to act ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice.The court also considered the argument that the High Court's jurisdiction in a reference is advisory or consultative and not original, appellate, or revisional. However, it held that the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court is independent of the nature of its jurisdiction in the reference. The High Court, as a 'court,' has inherent jurisdiction to act ex debito justitiae if the circumstances of a case so demand.The court further examined the provisions of sections 260(1), 262(1), and 265 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and their corresponding provisions in the Act of 1922. It concluded that these provisions do not preclude or prohibit the High Court from exercising its inherent jurisdiction to stay the recovery of tax. Section 265, which states that tax shall be payable notwithstanding a reference or appeal, was interpreted to mean that the liability to pay the tax continues and is not automatically suspended by the making of a reference or filing of an appeal. However, it does not imply that the High Court cannot stay the recovery of tax in a proper case.The court rejected the preliminary objection raised by the revenue and held that the High Court has inherent jurisdiction to stay the recovery of tax pending the disposal of the reference.2. Merits of the Application for Stay of Tax Recovery:On the merits of the application for stay, it was admitted that the tax for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1962-63 had already been paid in full by L. Bansi Dhar in his personal assessment. The court acknowledged the considerable hardship that would be caused to the assessee if the H.U.F. were required to pay the tax again in respect of the same income, especially when the liability of the H.U.F. to pay the tax had not yet been finally decided.The court considered this a fit case for granting the stay but imposed a condition. The recovery of the amounts of tax demanded for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1962-63 was stayed on the condition that the assessee should furnish adequate security for the said amounts to the satisfaction of the concerned Income-tax Officer within six weeks.Conclusion:The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to stay the recovery of tax pending the disposal of a reference under section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The stay was granted on the condition of furnishing adequate security.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found