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

2004 Supreme(Cal) 373

D.K.SETH, RAJENDRA NATH SINHA
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
J. L. MORRISON (INDIA) LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Anirban Mukherjee, C.S.DAS, J.P.KHAITAN, SUDIPTA ROY

D. K. SETH, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. J. P. Khaitan that the order was passed by the learned Tribunal at Bombay subject to the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court. The assessment for the concerned previous year reached its finality in another State over which the Tribunal and the High Court of that State had jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of this court cannot be stretched to the Tribunal in another State when the matter reaches finality in the other State.

( 2 ) IN his usual fairness, he had submitted that so far as the assessment for the subsequent years has since been transferred to this State but the concerned assessment having reached finality in another State the transfer of the cases for assessment of the subsequent years will not entitle the assessee to challenge the order of the assessment reached finality in another State, before the High Court of this State. Therefore, this High Court has no jurisdiction. Mr. Khaitan relied upon a decision of this High Court in CIT v. A. B. C. India Ltd. [2002] 255 ITR 108.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the applican





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