Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Ilac Ltd
High Court
12 Jul 2001 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Ilac Ltd
Date of order
12 Jul 2001
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Ilac Ltd, the High Court (2001) decided the matter.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO @ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus ILAC LTD. -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR BB NAIK for MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner No.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 87 of 1986
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO
of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO @
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Versus
ILAC LTD.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
MR BB NAIK for MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner No. 1 NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
and
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
Date of decision: 12/07/2001
ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE)
�At the instance of the revenue, the following
question has been referred to this court for its opinion
by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' under the provisions of sec. 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
"Whether the Appellate Tribunal has been right in law and on facts in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax had no jurisdiction to pass an order under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and hence his order was illegal?"
2.�We have heard learned advocate Shri B.B. Naik appearing for the revenue. Nobody has appeared for the respondent company though notice of this court has been duly served upon the Official Liquidator as the respondent copany has been ordered to be wound up by this
court.
3.�Looking to the law laid down by this court in I.T.R. No. 120/86 decided on 9th July 29001, we answer the question in the negative, i.e. in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.
�The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
�����(A.R. Dave, J.)
�����(D.A. Mehta, J.)
(hn)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.