The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay, City Vii, Bombay v. M/S Kamil Trust, 7 Mathew Road, Bombay
High Court
16 Jan 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay, City Vii, Bombay v. M/S Kamil Trust, 7 Mathew Road, Bombay
Date of order
16 Jan 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay, City Vii, Bombay v. M/S Kamil Trust, 7 Mathew Road, Bombay, the High Court (2012) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
Ladda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No.301 of 1995
The Commissioner of Income-tax,Bombay, City VII, Bombay
... Applicant.
Versus
M/s Kamil Trust, 7 Mathew Road, Bombay
... Respondent.
Mr Suresh Kumar for the applicant.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & A.R. Joshi, JJ.
DATE : 16 January, 2012.
P.C. :-
1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax Bombay City VII, the ITAT has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this Court.
(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the net wealth of the assessee trust is not taxable?
(2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not appreciating the fact that by Finance Act, 1970 Section 21 (4) was amended specifically for plugging loopholes in the law leading to tax avoidance and special rates were provided for taxing discretionary trusts?
Ladda
2.The assessment years involved herein are 1984-85 to 1986-87.
3.Counsel for the Revenue fairly states that both the questions are covered against the Revenue by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Director of Income-tax vs. Gopal Srinivasan Trust reported in (2002) 253 ITR 759,
wherein the decision of the ITAT in the case of Haresh Anitha Trust vs. CWT reported in (1988) 173 ITR 103, which was relied upon by the ITAT, has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case. In this view of the matter, both the questions referred to us by the ITAT are answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The reference is disposed off accordingly with no order as to costs.
(A.R.Joshi,J)
(J.P.Devadhar,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.