SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

P.VENKATARAMA REDDI, A.HANUMANTHU
Commissioner of Income Tax – Appellant
Versus
Parke Davis (India) Ltd. , Hyd. – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

P. VENKATARAMA REDDI, J.:

1. This is an application filed by CIT, A.P.-I under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act seeking reference of certain questions of law for the opinion of this Court.

2. As we are of the view that the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has no jurisdiction to entertain this petition, we are not expressing any view on the merits on any of the questions of law to be referred for the opinion of the High Court.

3. The appeals before the ITAT, Mumbai E Bench (it is not clear whether it is E bench or B bench) arose out of the assessment made for the year 1983-1984 under Section 143(3) by I AC, Assessment Range - V(A), Bombay.

4. The reference application was dismissed by Mumbai D Bench by an order dated 18-3-1997 communicated to the respondent on 15-7-1997.

5. The application under Section 256(2) in our view should have been filed in the High Court of Bombay and this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the application. The words “the High Court” occurring in Section 256 has obviously reference to the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Appellate Tribunal which declined to state the case, is located. It is not open to the petitioner

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top