In The Commisioner Of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Forest Development Corp, the High Court (1999) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX,Versus GUJARAT STATE FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORP. -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner NO...
Decision: The order under Section 263 has been set aside by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
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 APPLICATION No 291 of 1998
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE R.BALIA. and
MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
============================================================
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?
-------------------------------------------------------------- THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX,Versus
GUJARAT STATE FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORP.
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE R.BALIA. and
MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
Date of decision: 03/05/99
ORAL JUDGEMENT
1.�Mr. J.P. Shah appears for the respondent.
Service is complete. Heard learned counsel for the
parties. It has been pointed out by both learned counsel that the assessment out of which the present application has arisen are made in pursuance of an order under
Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The order under
Section 263 has been set aside by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal. A reference is pending before this
court on a question of law said to be arising out of that
order which has been referred to this court. As a
consequence, it is stated by both the learned counsel,
the question of law stated in this application under
Section 256(2) is required to be referred to this court
at the instance of Commissioner of Income Tax.
2.�Accordingly we allow this application and direct
the Tribunal to submit the statement of case and refer
the following question of law for the opinion of this
Court arising out of its appellate order in Income Tax
Application No. 4585/Ahd/1992 for assessment year
1985-86:
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case the Tribunal is right in law in holding
that the royalty cannot be treated as `tax' or
`duty' within the meaning of Sec.438, when it is
clearly held by Supreme Court in the case of
India Cement Company (188 ITR 690) that royalty
is a tax?"
�There shall be no order as to costs.
�����(Rajesh Balia, 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.