advocatemmmohan

My photo

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN -  Practicing both IN CIVIL, CRIMINAL AND FAMILY LAWS,Etc.,

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - FOR KNOWLEDGE IN LAW & FOR LEGAL OPINIONS - SHARE THIS

Thursday, January 24, 2013

“1. Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that no interest under section 16B was chargeable in this case? 2.Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that the provisions of section 16B(3) were applicable to this case.”


                                                                  REPORTABLE
                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3917 OF 2010


Satya Nand Munjal                             …..Appellant

                                       Versus

Commissioner of Gift Tax,
(Central), Ludhiana                           …..Respondent

                                    WITH

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3916 OF 2010

                                     AND

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3918 OF 2010


                               J U D G M E N T


Madan B. Lokur, J.

1. Civil Appeal No. 3917/2010 (Assessee:   Mr.  Satya  Nand  Munjal),  Civil
   Appeal No. 3916/2010  (Assessee:  Mr. Brij Mohan Lal  Munjal)  and  Civil
   Appeal No. 3918/2010 (Assessee: Om Prakash Munjal) arise  out  of  G.T.A.
   No. 1/2001, G.T.A. No. 4/2001 and G.T.A.  No.  5/2001  respectively,  all
   decided by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana  on  17th  December,  2008.
   The relevant Assessment Year is 1989-90.
2. The common substantial questions of law  referred  for  consideration  by
   the High Court, at the instance of the Revenue, in all the appeals  reads
   as follows :-
      “1. Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of  the  case,  the
      ITAT was right in law in holding that no interest  under  section  16B
      was chargeable in this case?


      2.Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT
      was right in law in holding that the provisions of section 16B(3) were
      applicable to this case.”


 3.   The High Court allowed the appeals on the basis of the common judgment
 and order rendered in G.T.A. No. 2/2001  and  G.T.A.  No.  3/2001  holding,
 inter alia, that since gift tax was leviable on the revocable  transfer  of
 equity shares by the assessee to M/s Yogesh Chandra & Brothers  Associates,
 interest was liable to be paid by the assessee on the gift tax levied.


 4.   Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order of  the  High  Court,  the
 assessees have preferred these appeals.


 5    We have today set aside the order of the High Court passed  in  G.T.A.
 No. 3/2001 and G.T.A. No. 2/2001 and have remanded the matters back to  the
 High Court for de novo consideration.


 6    In view thereof, the judgment and order in appeal in  these  cases  is
 also set aside.  The matters are remanded  to  the  High  Court  for  fresh
 consideration on the merits of the case.  The appeals are allowed but there
 will be no order as to costs.
                                       ….…….……………………..J.
                                        (D.K. Jain)





                                        ….…….……………………..J.
                                        (Madan B. Lokur)
New Delhi;
January  22, 2013




























No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.