Income Tax v. Dr.d.y.chandrachud, J
High Court
30 Mar 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Income Tax v. Dr.d.y.chandrachud, J
Date of order
30 Mar 2012
Assessment year(s)
1982-83, 1981-82
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Income Tax v. Dr.d.y.chandrachud, J, the High Court (2012) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO. 70 OF 1994
The Commissioner of Income-tax,Bombay....ApplicantVs.Mrs.V.V.Shah...Respondent
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Applicant.None for the Respondent.
CORAM:DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD ANDM.S.SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : 30[th] March, 2012.
P.C.
1.This Reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 has been made in respect of the assessment year 1982-83. The Tribunal noted that it has relied upon its order for assessment year 1981-82 and that on an identical aspect of the matter, a reference was made to this Court for the earlier year.
2.The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue has placed on record a copy of the order dated 1 August 2007 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Income Tax Reference No.161 of 1995 (The Commissioner of
2 ITR-70-94
Income Tax vs. Smt. V.V.Shah) pertaining to the earlier assessment year 1981-82, where the reference was returned as unanswered since the tax effect was less than Rs.4 lakhs. The learned Counsel states that the same position would govern in respect of this Reference. Consequently, since we are informed by the learned Counsel that the tax effect is less than Rs.4 lakhs and following the earlier decision of this Court, the Reference is returned unanswered.
(DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.)
(M.S.SANKLECHA,J.)
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.