Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Rajendra Brothers
High Court
18 Jul 1996 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Rajendra Brothers
Date of order
18 Jul 1996
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Rajendra Brothers, 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-TAXVersus RAJENDRA BROTHERS -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner SERVED BY RPAD for Responde...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 241 of 1985
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL and
MR.JUSTICE R.R.JAIN
============================================================
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-TAXVersus RAJENDRA BROTHERS -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner
SERVED BY RPAD for Respondent No. 1
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL and
MR.JUSTICE R.R.JAIN
Date of decision: 18/07/96
ORAL JUDGEMENT
��"Tribunal has referred the following
question under Section 256 (1) of the Income tax Act,
1961 to this court for opinion :
"Whether, the Appellate Tribunal has been right
in law and on facts in confirming the view taken
by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in
granting allowance of Rs,31,408/- being interest on the package credit?" The respondent assessee is served by has chosen not to appear before this Court. Looking to the language of Section 35B (1)(b) of the Act, the assessee is not entitled to get the benefit. The case is covered by decision of this Court in the case of C.I.T. vs. Jay Industries, 196 ITR, 313. Hence, the question is to be answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. Accordingly, the reference is answered 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.