The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chandrakant Dahyabhai Patel (Huf
High Court
27 Sep 2000 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chandrakant Dahyabhai Patel (Huf
Date of order
27 Sep 2000
Assessment year(s)
1994-95
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chandrakant Dahyabhai Patel (Huf, the High Court (2000) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus CHANDRAKANT DAHYABHAI PATEL (HUF) -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR B.
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 361 of 1999
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
============================================================
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 Civil Judge? : NO
-------------------------------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Versus
CHANDRAKANT DAHYABHAI PATEL (HUF)
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
MR B. B. Naik with Mr. MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner MR SN SOPARKAR for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
Date of decision: 27/09/2000
ORAL JUDGEMENT
After hearing learned counsel for the department and assessee, and on perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal deciding the appeal as also the order refusing
to refer the proposed questions , we are of the opinion that on the proposed question No.1 in this memo of application, the following question of law does arise.
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the ITAT was justified in holding that the transfer of land would not fall in the period 1993-94 relevant to assessment year 1994-95 with reference to the deed of ratification dated 18.4.1996 and handing over of the possession of land for building activities in 1993 as per oral
agreement in that year?"
We, therefore, allow this application. The Tribunal is directed to prepare a statement of case and send it to this court on the above question No.1 proposed in this application. Rule is made absolute,but with no order as
to costs.
���(D. M. Dharmadhikari,C.J.)
���(A. R.Dave, J.)
parekh
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.