Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Kanchanjunga Investment Pvt. Limited
High Court
11 Jan 2001 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Kanchanjunga Investment Pvt. Limited
Date of order
11 Jan 2001
Assessment year(s)
1981-82
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Kanchanjunga Investment Pvt. Limited, the High Court (2001) decided the matter.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus KANCHANJUNGA INVESTMENT PVT.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 25 of 1988
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
============================================================
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
KANCHANJUNGA INVESTMENT PVT. LIMITED
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
MR AKIL QURESHI with MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner
SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL
and
MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
Date of decision: 11/01/2001
ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH)
�In this reference at the instance of the revenue,
the following question is referred for our opinion in
respect of Assessment Year 1981-82 :-
"Whether the Appellate Tribunal has not erred in law and on facts in holding that the interest of Rs.5,29,798/- was not chargeable from Sercon
Private Ltd ?"
2.�We have heard Mr Akil Qureshi, learned counsel for the revenue and Mr RK Patel, learned counsel for the assessee. The learned counsel have invited our attention to the order dated 28.2.2000 in ITR No. 63/85, order dated 20.9.1999 in ITR No. 195/84 and the order dated 8.1.2001 in ITR No. 290/85. Relying on the aforesaid orders in references between the same parties, we send back the case to the Tribunal to pass appropriate orders taking into consideration the observations made in the order dated 20.9.1999 of this Court in ITR NO. 195 of
1984.
�The reference accordingly stands disposed of with
no order as to costs.
����(J.M. Panchal, J.)
����(M.S. Shah, J.)
sundar/-
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.