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

2000 Supreme(Cal) 130

Y.R.MEENA, GORACHAND DE
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
J. K. INDUSTRIES LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Debi Prasad Pal, J.P.KHAITAN, N.C.ROY CHAUDHARY, SUDIPTA ROY

Y. R. MEENA, J.

( 1 ) BY this appeal, the appellants have challenged the impugned judgment of a learned single judge dated January 28, 1999 (see [1999] 238 ITR 820), and prayed that the impugned judgment be set aside.

( 2 ) THE petitioner/respondent is a company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The respondent-company filed the declaration under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme for the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93 to settle the tax arrears for the said assessment years. On account of settlement of the tax liability under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, there was a refund due. Instead of refunding that amount part of the amount of refund due was adjusted against the tax liability and withheld that refund due to the petitioner and there was no tax arrear within the meaning of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998. The petitioner has wrongly been deprived of his right to get the refund due.

( 3 ) AGAINST the balance demands payable for the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93, respondent No. 2 had set off refunds. An intimation was sent to the petitioners by respondent No. 2. On receipt of the intimation, the petitioner raised objection to the set off by respondent N
















































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