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

2002 Supreme(Kar) 792

G.C.BHARUKA, K.SREEDHAR RAO
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
MANGALORE GANESH BEEDI WORKS – Respondent


G. C. BHARUKA, J.

( 1 ) ON an application made by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 256 (1) of the income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act"), the Tribunal has referred the following questions of law seeking opinion of this court :

" (i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in setting aside the order of the Commissioner under Section 263 ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was nothing wrong in the asses-see valuing the closing stock at cost instead of at market price ? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that there was no transfer of capital assets of the firm to the partners even though the assessee-firm stood dissolved on December 18, 1987 ?"

( 2 ) IN order to answer the above questions of law, we need to narrate the relevant facts to the extent those are found necessary for the purpose. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1989-90.

( 3 ) SOME time in 1939, the late S. Raghuram Prabhu started the business of manufacturing beedies. Subsequently, his brother-in-law, Sri M









































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