Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bilaspur v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunai, Jabalpur & Another

^\'..^^;^"",.^y<cssr'v'" ..V^-t""''s>.Ae*-"BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHATBILASPURRwlsioiTAX CASE No. Izfc-"/2006APPELLANT. Commissioner of Income Tax,BUaspur.VERSUSRESPONDENTS1.IncomeTaxAppellateTribunal, Jabalpur.2.SitaramGurudiwan,MIG-10,ShardaVihar,KorbaAPPEAL UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ^, HiGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR: CHHATTISGARHDMSiON BENCH CORAM:HON'BLE SHRI H.L. DATTU, CJ. &HON'BLE SHRI V.K. SHRIVASTAVA, J. APPELLANTRESPONDENTS TAX CASE N0. 25 OF 2006 Commissioner of Income Tax, Bilaspur Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunai,Jabalpur & Another. Present:Shri B.K. Rawat, counsel for the appellant. ORAL ORDER(Passed on 22nd February, 2007) ThefollowingoralorderoftheCourtwaspassedbyi, C.J. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the IncomeTaxAppellateTribunal,JabalpurBench,JabalpurinI.T.A.No.237/Jab/2005fortheassessment2003-2004datedyear18.05.2cx)6. (2)In the memorandum of appeal the appellant has raisedthe fo!!owing questions of law for our consideration and decision. Theyare as under: " QUESTIONS OF LAW (i)Whether on the facts and in the cireumstance ofthe case, the Tribunal was justifiedinlaw indirectingthe A.O.toallow theclaimof theassesseeforexemptionU/s.10(100)oftheIncome Tax Act, 1961 to the extent of Rs. 5 Lakh?(ii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was justified in applying the retrospectivelyfor amendment, prospective Assessment Year 2003-20047 (iii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was jush'fied in giving aliberal interpretation to the relevant provisions,which constituted 'substantive law'?(iv)That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased toframe other question of law as deem proper." (3)In our opinion, in view of the ordsrs passed by this Courtin Income Tax Reference No.76 of 1997 disposed of on 30.01.2004, thequestions[of][ law][ raised][ by][ the][ Revenue][ are][ not][ debatable.]In theaforesaid decision, Vh'is Court was pieased to observe that "havingregard to the facts and circumstances ofthe case, we are ofthe opinionthat the Tribunaf was justified in law in dismissing the Departmentalappeai as incompetent as per Board's cireular dated 18.11.1992,without deciding the case on merits." (4)We are in fuil agreement with the view expressed in theaforesaid decision.Accordingly, the questions of law raised by theRevenue are answered against the Revenue and in favour of theSd/-assessee. Ordered accordingly.VK.ShrivastavaSd/-JudgeChiefJustice