Back
2017 Supreme(SC) 811
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.K. AGRAWAL, ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.
Maharaja Amrinder Singh – Appellant(s)
VERSUS
The Commissioner of Wealth Tax – Respondent(s)
CIVIL APPEAL No.1349 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.1350 OF 2007
Decided On : 05-09-2017
IMPORTANT POINT
Section 27-A of Wealth Tax Act being in pari materia with section 100 CPC cannot be decided without formulating substantial question of law.
Headnote:Wealth Tax Act, 1957 – Section 27-A – Provision incorporating provisions of section 100, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with minor modification – Section 27-A being “legislation by incorporation" qua section 100 is in pari materia thereof – “Substantial question of law” and “question of law” – Substantial question of law required to be formulated – Instantly, High court decided the appeal without formulating question of law – Not sustainable. (Para 7, 9, 11)
(2001) 3 SCC 179 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
The appellant is wealth tax assessee and the case pertains to the Assessment Years 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84.
The issue involved in these three assessment years was decided by the Tribunal in favour of the appellant (assessee).
The High Court allowed the appeals filed by the Revenue.
Finding of the Court:
Impugned judgment is not sustainable.
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1) These appeals are filed against the final judgment and orders dated 24.08.2004 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Wealth Tax Appeal Nos. 10 & 11/2001 and 3,4 & 5/2002 respectively whereby the High Court allowed the appeals filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Wealth Tax) under Section 27-A of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and set aside the order dated 05.07.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”), Chandigarh Bench in W.T.A. No.11,12 & 13/Chandi/95 & C.O. No.37/Chandi/95 in W.T.A. No.11/Chandi/95 and order dated 13.06.2001 in W.T.A. Nos.213, 191 and 192/Chandi/94 and restored the order of assessment passed by the Assessing officer for levying penalty for the entire period of delay in respect of Assessment Years 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84.
2) Few facts need mention for disposal of the appeals.
3) The appellant is the wealth tax assessee and is subjected to payment of Wealth Tax under the Act. The case pertains to the Assessment Years 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84. The issue involved in these three assessment years was decided by the Tribunal in favour of the appellant (assessee) which gave rise to filing of the appeals before the High Court by the Revenue under Section 27-A of the Act questioning therein the legality and correctness of the orders of the Tribunal. As mentioned above, the High Court allowed the appeals filed by the Revenue, which has given rise to filing of these appeals by way of special leave before this Court by the assessee.
4) The short question, which arises for consideration in these appeals, is whether the High Court was justified in allowing the appeals filed by the Revenue and thereby was justified in setting aside the orders passed by the Tribunal.
5) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeals and while setting aside of the impugned orders of the High Court remand the case to the High Court for deciding the appeals afresh on merits after formulating the substantial questions of law, if it so arises in the case.
6) Section 27 -A of the Wealth Tax Act reads as under
“27-A Appeal to High Court. —
(1) The assessee or the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner may within one hundred twenty days of the day upon which he is served with notice of an order under section 24 or section 26 or clause (e) of sub-section (1) of section 35, file on or after the 1st day of October, 1998 but before the date of establishment of the National Tax Tribunal appeal before the High Court.
(1A) The High Court may admit an appeal after the expiry of the period of one hundred and twenty days referred to in sub-section (1), if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the same within that period.
(2) An appeal shall lie to the High Court before the date of establishment the National Tax Tribunal from every order passed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal, under sub-section (1) of section 24 only if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law.
(3) In an appeal under this section, the Memorandum of Appeal shall precisely state the substantial question of law involved in the appeal.
(4) Where the High Court is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved in any case, it shall formulate that question.
(5) The appeal shall be heard only on the question so formulated and the respondent shall, at the time of hearing of the appeal, be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such question: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that the case involves such question.
(6) The High Court shall decide the question of law so formulated and deliver
