1969 (4) TMI 10 - HC - Income Tax

Tribunal's Authority to Revisit Orders: Clarification on Income Tax Act Section 66

The High Court of ALLAHABAD clarified that under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, a fresh statement of case and questions of law can be requested ... Application to High Court u/s. 66(2) - not become infructuous Issues:1. Interpretation of Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 regarding the submission of a statement of case and questions of law to the High Court.2. Determination of whether a fresh statement of case and questions of law can be requested after the Tribunal has already passed orders in conformity with the High Court's judgment.3. Analysis of the legal provisions under Section 66(2) and Section 66(5) of the Act regarding the disposal of cases and the finality of Tribunal orders.Detailed Analysis:The judgment by the High Court of ALLAHABAD pertains to applications made under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 by the assessee, who are bankers carrying on the business of banking. The matter involved assessment proceedings for the years 1940-41 to 1946-47, which were taken up to the Income-tax Tribunal. The Tribunal decided the second appeal under Section 33 of the Act, leading to an application by the assessee for a statement of case and questions of law to be referred to the High Court under Section 66(1) of the Act. The Tribunal made a statement of the case and referred some questions to the High Court, numbered as I.T.R. No. 167 of 1955. Subsequently, the Tribunal passed orders in conformity with the High Court's judgment on September 17, 1962, and rectified the order on August 25, 1965.One of the key issues raised in the judgment was whether a fresh statement of case and questions of law could be requested after the Tribunal had already implemented the High Court's judgment. The interpretation of Section 66 of the Act was crucial in determining the permissibility of seeking a second reference. The High Court analyzed the language of the statute, emphasizing that the law contemplated one order by the High Court and not successive orders. The court noted that the provision did not envisage the Tribunal amending its judgment successively in line with multiple judgments from the High Court.The judgment delved into the legal provisions under Section 66(2) and Section 66(5) of the Act to ascertain the finality of Tribunal orders and the disposal of cases. The court highlighted that Section 66(2) provides a legal right to the assessee and the Commissioner of Income-tax to challenge the Tribunal's decision by moving the High Court. The court's interpretation suggested that an application under Section 66(2) could be made even after a reference under Section 66(1) had been disposed of, subject to the application being within the statutory time limit. This analysis led to the conclusion that if an application under Section 66(2) is made and a reference is called for, the Tribunal must reopen the matter and pass a fresh order in accordance with the High Court's decision on the question of law submitted.In conclusion, the High Court determined that the petitions had not become infructuous, indicating that the legal process under Section 66 of the Act allowed for subsequent references and fresh orders by the Tribunal based on the High Court's judgments. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of the statutory provisions and their implications on the disposal of cases and the authority of the Tribunal to revisit its orders in light of High Court decisions.