Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the High Court ought to have directed the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case and refer the reframed question as to whether the sum of Rs. 1,30,785 could in law be treated as income, profits and gains under the facts and circumstances of the case.
Analysis: The question whether the amount realised on transfer of the assets, and particularly the excess of sale proceeds over the written down value, could be treated as taxable income involved a legal issue and was not merely one of fact. The refusal of the Tribunal to make a reference did not conclude the matter where a question of law arose from the facts found. In such a situation, the High Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under section 66(2), was required to require the Tribunal to state a case and refer the question for opinion.
Conclusion: The High Court should have directed a reference of the reframed question; the assessee succeeded on the reference issue.
Final Conclusion: The matter was sent back for the statutory reference process, and the legal question on taxability was left to be answered by the High Court on reference.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the facts disclose a debatable question of law arising from an assessment dispute, the High Court must, on an appropriate application, require the Tribunal to state a case and refer that question for decision.