Case LawHigh Court › Family Trust v. Cit In Itr

Family Trust v. Cit In Itr

High Court 31 Aug 2006 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Family Trust v. Cit In Itr
Date of order
31 Aug 2006
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Family Trust v. Cit In Itr, the High Court (2006) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the 4constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?5[Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ]? =========================================================COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - Applicant(s...

Decision: The parties submit that as the very foundation of the order impugned has become nonest, the orders passed by the Tribunal may be set aside and the matters be remanded back to the Tribunal with directions as issued in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust.

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. 101 of 1997With INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 102 of 1997To INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 103 of 1997 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH =========================================================1[Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed ]to see the judgment ? 2To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3[Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy ]of the judgment ? Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the 4constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?5[Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ]? =========================================================COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - Applicant(s)Versus APARNA FAMILY TRUST, - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MRS. MONA R BHATTfor Applicant(s) : 1,MR SN SOPARKAR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM :HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 31/08/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG) 1. The parties submit that the Tribunal, while deciding the matters has relied upon its earlier judgment in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust and issued certain directions. The said matter of Sanjiv Family Trust was referred to this judgment in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust and issued certain directions. The said matter of Sanjiv Family Trust was referred to this Court and ITR No. 149/95 was accordingly registered. The parties submit that ITR No. 149/95 with its analogous matters is finally disposed of on 13.7.06, order passed in the said matter has been set aside by this Court and the matter has been remanded back to the Tribunal with certain directions. The parties submit that as the very foundation of the order impugned has become nonest, the orders passed by the Tribunal may be set aside and the matters be remanded back to the Tribunal with directions as issued in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust. 2. After hearing the parties and going through our order, dated 13.7.06 in the matter of Sanjiv order, dated 13.7.06 in the matter of Sanjiv Family Trust Vs. CIT in ITR No. 149/95, we are of the opinion that the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties must be accepted. 3. The orders passed by the Tribunal in each of the case are hereby set aside. Without deciding the questions, we remand the matter to the learned Tribunal with a direction that the Tribunal questions, we remand the matter to the learned Tribunal with a direction that the Tribunal ITR/101/19973/3JUDGMENTshall reconsider the entire matter and redetermine the liability of the assessee, that is, the beneficiary of the first level Trust. It would be open to the Tribunal to reconsider the matters afresh and decide the matters in accordance with law after taking into consideration the judgments in the matter of McDowell & Co. Ltd., v.. C.T.O., reported n 154 IR 148, Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan reported in 263 ITR 706, 209 ITR 101 and 231 ITR 540 on which reliance is placed by the parties. As we are remanding the matters back to the Tribunal, we refuse to make any observations on the merits of the matters as the same is likely to adversely affect the rights of either party. The References are accordingly disposed of. No costs. [R.S. GARG, J.] pirzada/- [M.R. SHAH, J.]
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan