Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Mohammad Sharif and S.A. Hakeem, JJ.
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Karnataka, Bangalore —Appellant
Vs.
Vidyavathi Kapur —Respondent
Civil Petition Nos. 326 and 327 of 1983
Decided on : 21-06-1984
rule 1BB - Applicability of Procedural Rule - The court held that rule 1BB is procedural in nature and can be applied to pending matters, leading to the rejection of the department's reference request.
Fact of the Case:
The Department sought a reference on the applicability of rule 1BB in two specific circumstances.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the reference request, stating that there was no question of law arising from the Tribunal's order as it is undisputed that procedural rules can be applied to pending matters.
Issues: Applicability of rule 1BB, remitting the matter back to the Wealth-tax Officer, entertaining additional ground requiring fresh facts for decision
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that rule 1BB is procedural in nature and can be applied to pending matters, leading to the rejection of the reference request.
Final Decision: The civil petitions were rejected by the court.
Jagannatha Shetty, J.—The Department seeks a reference in respect of the following two questions :
"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in remitting the matter back to the Wealth-tax Officer for a fresh disposal after applying rule 1BB even though no retrospective effect is given to this rule ?
2. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in entertaining the additional ground even though it required fresh fact for decision which had to be gathered on further enquiries ?"
2. The dispute in respect of both the questions relates to the applicability of rule 1BB. The Tribunal has held that it is a procedural rule and, therefore, it may be given effect to even in respect of pending matters. There is no dispute and indeed it cannot be disputed that rule 1BB is procedural in nature. That being the portion, we fail to see any question of law arising out of the order the Tribunal, since it is always not disputed that the rules of procedure can be called into aid in respect of pending matters.
3. Civil petitions are, accordingly, rejected.
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
