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

1998 Supreme(Del) 816

C.K.MAHAJAN, R.C.LAHOTI
PREM CHAND BANSAL AND SONS – Appellant
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER – Respondent


R. C. Lahoti, J.

( 1 ) AN application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of delay in filing a petition under Section 256 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is the subject matter of the present order.

( 2 ) THE facts in brief.

2. 1. BEFORE the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal , the subject matter of controversy inter alia was disallowance of Rs. 2,15,453. 00 claimed by the assessee under Section 43-B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on account of payment of sales tax made by the assessee within the time prescribed by the H. P. Sales Tax Act. The appeal having been decided adversely to the petitioner assessee, the assessee filed an application under Section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 seeking reference to the High Court of the question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal. The application was rejected on 30. 5. 95 by the Tribunal forming an opinion that the answer to the question was covered by a decision of Delhi High Court, which is jurisdiction High Court in Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors. , (1991) 189 ITR 81=43 (1991) DLT 207 (DB ). Copy of the order was communicated to the petitioner on 28. 6. 95.

2. 2. The petitioner was advised not to



















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