High CourtsFull Bench(2004) 10 MP CK 0060

Commissioner of Income Tax vs Vippy Solvex Products (P) Ltd.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 5 October 2004 · Citation: (2005) 144 TAXMAN 185

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Kumar Tiwari, J · A.M. Sapre, J
CASE NUMBER
Income Tax R. No. 22 of 1997 5 October 2004. & M.C.C. No. 186 of 1995 5 October 2004

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 413 words

Sapre, J.

This is an application made u/s 256(2) of the Income Tax Act by the Revenue (Commissioner of income tax) consequent upon the dismissal of their application made u/s 256(1) of the Act by the Tribunal by order dated 1-9-1994, passed in R.A. No. 295/Ind./93 which in turn arises out of an order dated 17-9-1993, passed in ITA No. 663/ Ind./88 by the Tribunal. By this application the revenue has prayed for calling the reference from the Tribunal on the following question of law for answer by this court u/s 256(1) of the Act.

2.

This is the question which the revenue wants this court to answer on merits:

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal was justified in law in allowing Development Rebate on Plant and Machinery for which agreement to supply was entered into on 28-12-1973 ?"

3.

Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri G.M. Chafekar, learned Senior counsel with Ku. V. Kasrekar, learned counsel for the non-applicant.

4.

The aforesaid question arises out of assessment year 1976-77. It may be mentioned that this court has answered this very question arising out of the other assessment years cases of this very assessee u/s 256(1) of the Act in ITR No. 22 of 1997 decided on 5-10-2004. In this view of the matter and under these circumstances, the question proposed above by the revenue for the year in question does arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal and the same has to be held as being question of law for being answered by this court u/s 256(1) of the Act. We cannot answer the said question on merits unless it is referred to this court by the Tribunal u/s 256(1) of the Act. It is for this reason, we allow this application and direct the Tribunal to send to this court a statement of case alongwith the following question of law which does arise out of the order of the Tribunal, referred supra:

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal was justified in law in allowing Development Rebate on Plant and Machinery for which agreement to supply was entered into on 28-12-1973 ?"

5.

Let the statement of case be drawn and refer to this court within three months by the Tribunal. The record of the case be sent back to Tribunal, if requisitioned by the Registry alongwith the copy of order.

No costs.