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

1951 Supreme(P&H) 148

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
D.Falshaw and Khosla JJ.
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi
Versus
Punjab National Bank, Limited, Delhi
Civil Miscellaneous No. 150 of 1951,
Decided On : OCTOBER 4, 1951

A point of law can arise out of an order of the Tribunal even if it has not been discussed in the order itself.

Headnote:

INCOME TAX - Reference to High Court - Question of law arising out of order of Tribunal - Whether point of law can arise which has not been discussed in the order itself - Interpretation of Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act.

Fact of the Case:

The Punjab National Bank had its head office in Lahore until the partition of the Province of the Punjab. After the partition, the Bank shifted its head office to Delhi and requested the Income-tax authorities at Lahore to transfer the records relating to its income-tax affairs to Delhi. The Bank filed appeals before the Allahabad Bench of the Income-tax Tribunal, which then had jurisdiction over the Punjab. After the partition, the appeals were sent to the Presidents Bench at Bombay, which was of the opinion that the appeals should be heard by the Pakistan Tribunal. The Pakistan Bench declined to hear and decide the appeals on the ground that the records had been sent to India. Thereafter, the appeals came up for hearing before the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal, which had been constituted by that time, and they were heard and decided. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, filed applications under Section 66(1) before the Delhi Bench, asking it to make a statement of the case and refer certain questions to the High Court. The Tribunal dismissed the applications, being of the opinion that the confusion which had crept in regarding the substitution of different respondents in the two cases was immaterial, as the Department had accepted notice and had been properly represented in the appeals, and that the substantial points raised in the two questions which are first mentioned above did not arise out of the orders of the Tribunal in the appeals, since the points involved therein had never been raised at all or argued.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that a point of law can arise out of an order of the Tribunal even if it has not been discussed in the order itself. However, the Court dismissed the applications filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, on the ground that the questions involved in the applications were of such a nature that they ought not to be allowed to be raised at this stage.

Issues: 1. Whether a point of law can arise out of an order of the Tribunal even if it has not been discussed in the order itself? 2. Whether the questions involved in the applications filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, ought to be allowed to be raised at this stage?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court relied on the decision of the Privy Council in Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Presidency v. Khemchand Ramdas, which held that a question of law can arise out of an order of the Tribunal even if it has not been discussed in the order itself. 2. The Court held that the questions involved in the applications filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, were of such a nature that they ought not to be allowed to be raised at this stage, as they involved matters of fact as well as law and the Department had waited until after the decisions of the appeals by the Tribunal on the merits in order to raise these questions of jurisdiction and the substitution of the Income-tax Officers at Delhi for the Income-tax Officer at Lahore as the respondents in the appeals.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed the applications filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, with costs.

Judgment

FALSHAW, J.

1. These are two petition by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act asking this Court to require the Delhi Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case and refer certain questions to this court, the applications of the commissioner under Section 66(1) having been rejected by the Tribunal. Briefly the facts giving rise to the applications are that the respondent Bank, the Punjab National Bank Limited, had its head office at Lahore until towards the end of June, 1947, when the Bank shifted its head office to Delhi in view of the approaching partition of the Province of the Punjab. Prior to that the Bank had been for purposes of income-tax assessment within the sphere of the Income-tax Officer, E Ward, Lahore, who had dealt with the Banks assessments to income-tax for the years 1945-45 and 1945-46 on the March 28, 1945, and the August 19, 1946, respectively. The Bank had filed appeals against these orders both of which were decided by the appellate Assistant Commissioner by his orders dated October 25, 1946, and December 31, 1946, respectively. Although the Bank had partially succeeded in these appeals it was not satisfied, and it had filed appeals in both cases before the Allahabad Bench of the Income-tax Tribunal, which then had jurisdiction over the Punjab. These appeals were still pending on the August 15, 1947. It may be mentioned that before that date the Bank in addition to removing its head office from Lahore to Delhi had also requested the Income-tax authorities at Lahore to transfer to Delhi the records relating to its head office from Lahore to Delhi had also requested the Income-tax authorities at Lahore to transfer to Delhi the records relating to its income-tax affairs and this was done though it is not clear exactly when. It seems that these appeals, and probably others which had been filed relating to income-tax assessments at Lahore, were sent by the Allahabad Bench to the Presidents Bench at Bombay, which apparently was of the opinion that the appeals should be heard by the Pakistan Tribunal set up after the partition and a date for hearing in these appeals was actually fixed in March, 1948, when it seems the Pakistan Bench declined to hear and decide them on the ground that the records had been sent to India. Thereafter the appeals came up for hearing before the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal, which had apparently been constituted by that time, and they were heard and decided on the December 13, 1949. The appeal regarding the assessment year 1945-46 was accepted in toto and that relating to the assessment year 1944-45 was accepted in part. It seems that in these appeals when they were heard by the Delhi Tribunal notice was issued to the Income-tax Officer of the appropriate circle of Delhi and that he was represented in the appeals by counsel who opposed them and that no question at all was raised in the appeals either regarding whether the proper respondent had been impleaded and whether the Income-tax Officer, Companies Circle, Delhi, could properly be substituted as a respondent for the Income-tax Officer, E Ward, Lahore, or whether the Delhi Tribunal or indeed any branch of the Tribunal in India had jurisdiction to hear the appeals. After the decisionst, however, these points were raised in applications filed on behalf of the commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, under Section 66(1) before the Delhi BEnch which was asked to make a statement of the case and refer the following two questions to the High Court :-

"(1) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, had jurisdiction to hear the appeal arising out of the order of the Income-tax Officer, E Ward, Lahore;

(2) Whether the Tribunal was legally correct in showing the Income-tax Officer, in one case Private Salary Circle, Delhi, and in the other case Companies Circle, New Delhi, as respondents despite the fact that the assessment under appeal was made by the Income-tax Office
















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 Back to top