Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Natwarlal Shankerbhai
High Court
16 Aug 1996 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Natwarlal Shankerbhai
Date of order
16 Aug 1996
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Natwarlal Shankerbhai, the High Court (1996) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus NATWARLAL SHANKERBHAI -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: Mr.P.K.
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 4 of 1983
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.J.PANDYA and
MR.JUSTICE S.D.PANDIT
============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question
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?
--------------------------------------------------------------
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Versus
NATWARLAL SHANKERBHAI
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
Mr.P.K. Jani with MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner
MR KC PATEL, ;Mr.D.A.Mehta & Mr.R.K.Patel for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.J.PANDYA and
MR.JUSTICE S.D.PANDIT
Date of decision: 16/08/96
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per N.J.Pandya,J.)
�At the time the Reference came to be made only
one decision given by the Orissa High Court was holding
the field. This case was reported in ITR 497 Orissa,
parties name being Govinda Chaudhary & Sons vs. CIT
2.�The factual aspect of the dispute between the
assessee and the Department relates to interest having been granted to the respondent-assessee when he had to fight a civil litigation for getting his dues from the Government in relation to a construction contract. The contract was entered into somewhere in the year 1953 and the work thereunder was completed in the year 1958. Finally, a decree came to be passed in favour of the assessee by this Court presumably in appeal to the tune of Rs.1,13,189/-. Rs.48,639/- was interest component of
the said total amount.
3.�While assesssing the income for the year 1976-77,
the question before the I.T.O. related to the said sum of Rs.48,639/-received by the assessee as interest and dispute related to whether it should be treated as revenue receipt or not.
4.�The Income-tax Officer held that it is taxable as such and the matter was carried before the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, in view of the said Orissa decision, the issue came tobe decided in favour of the assessee, but the said Orissa decision having been carried by the Department before the Supreme Court, the Department was
granted reference as under:
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming
to the conclusion that the interest received by
the assessee from the Government was not liable
to be taxed?
The said Supreme Court decision is now reported in 203
ITR 881 (Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Govinda
Chaudhary & Sons. whereunder, the Honourable Supreme Court, so far as the present assessee-respondent is concerned, has clearly held that this will be a revenue receipt. This position is clearly accepted by the respondent with a request that suitable observation by this Court be made that when the said sum of Rs.48,639/- is to be considered as revenue receipt, it may be taxed in the same manner as other revenue receipts were taxed by the Department in the said assessment year. This request is reasonable and hence it is granted and the Department shall assess the same in that manner.
done and the Reference is answered in the affirmative
with no order as to costs.
���******
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.