2019 (12) TMI 866

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....First Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Room No.20; by which an application questioning the maintainability of the suit, i.e., Application No.A-38 filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in Regular Suit No.609 of 2003 (Rajendra Kumar Gupta. Vs. Income Tax Officer) has been rejected. 3. The respondent in the present revision is the legal heir of late (Shri) Roop Narain Gupta, who was running a hotel and also dealing in business of tea in the name and style of Planters Tea at 1, Sri Ram Road, Aminabad, Lucknow and both the businesses were covered under Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The father of respondent made default in payment of Income Tax. Therefore, the Income Tax Department served a notice of demand which was challenged by the father ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....filing an appeal before the CIT (Appeals). Reliance is also placed by the learned counsel for revisionist on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax and another. Vs. Parmeshwari Devi Sultania and others) (1998) Vol.230 ITR 745; T. Arvivandandam. Vs. T.V. Satyapal and another: 1977 (4) SCC 467 (para 5), I.T.C. Limited. Vs. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and others: 1998 (2) SCC 70 (para 16). 10. Suffice would be to refer to the judgment in the case of Parmeshwari Devi (supra) which arises from the income tax proceedings only. In the said judgment, Supreme Court held:- "We do not think that the High Court approached the question in its proper perspective. It failed to consider the efect of the....