Itr/64/1992 Of Dhaulgiri Investments Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
17 Jul 2002 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Itr/64/1992 Of Dhaulgiri Investments Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
17 Jul 2002
Assessment year(s)
1983-84
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Itr/64/1992 Of Dhaulgiri Investments Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2002) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? @ DHAULGIRI INVESTMENTS PVT.
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 64 of 1992
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
============================================================ 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 concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? @ DHAULGIRI INVESTMENTS PVT. LTDVersus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 64 of 1992 MR RK PATEL for Petitioner No. 1 MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH and MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
Date of decision: 17/07/2002
(Per : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH)
�In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following question is referred for our opinion in respect of assessment year 1983-84:-
assessee, the following question is referred for our
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal is right in law in coming
to the conclusion that short provision for
taxation of earlier years is not required to be
deducted while computing the distributable income
for the purpose of levy of tax u/s.104 of the
Act?"
2.�We have heard Mr RK Patel, learned counsel for the applicant- assessee and Mr Manish R Bhatt, learned Sr. Standing Counsel for the revenue.
the applicant- assessee and Mr Manish R Bhatt, learned
3.�Having gone through the order of the Assessing Officer, the appellate order and the Tribunal's order and having regard to the smallness of the amount, we decline to answer the question referred for our opinion.
4.�The Reference accordingly stands disposed of with
no order as to costs.
���(M.S. Shah,J)�(K.A. Puj,J)
zgs/-
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.