Skip to content


Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. R.S. Seth Ghisalal Modi Family Trust - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Subject

Direct Taxation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Case Number

M.C.C. No. 63 of 1986

Judge

Reported in

(1987)61CTR(MP)102; [1988]169ITR530(MP)

Acts

Wealth Tax Act, 1957 - Sections 27(3)

Appellant

Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Respondent

R.S. Seth Ghisalal Modi Family Trust

Appellant Advocate

R.C. Mukati, Adv.

Respondent Advocate

None

Excerpt:


- .....seth ghisalal modi family trust (m. c. c. no. 312 of 1984 : see appendix on page 531 infra) whereby the application filed by the petitioner under section 27(3) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, was dismissed in motion hearing by declining to call upon the tribunal to make a reference as prayed for therein. 3. the learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the decision in k. ahamad v. cit : [1974]96itr29(ker) , which is a full bench decision of the kerala high court, submitted that this court under its inherent powers can review the said order as, according to the learned counsel, this court has wrongly relied on the decision in cwt v. smt. tarabai kanakmal : [1983]140itr374(mp) which is a full bench decision of this court. 4. the learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submitted that as this authority has been wrongly applied while deciding that case, this court should review its earlier order. however, we are unable to agree with this submission as the authority of the kerala high court cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is distinguishable and even assuming, as was submitted, that we have referred to a wrong decision, in our opinion, that by itself is not.....

Judgment:


1. Shri R.C. Mukati, counsel for the petitioner, heard on admission.

2. The applicant, who is the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Bhopal, has filed this review petition against an order dated July 16, 1985, passed in CWT v. R.S. Seth Ghisalal Modi Family Trust (M. C. C. No. 312 of 1984 : See Appendix on page 531 infra) whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, was dismissed in motion hearing by declining to call upon the Tribunal to make a reference as prayed for therein.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the decision in K. Ahamad v. CIT : [1974]96ITR29(Ker) , which is a Full Bench decision of the Kerala High Court, submitted that this court under its inherent powers can review the said order as, according to the learned counsel, this court has wrongly relied on the decision in CWT v. Smt. Tarabai Kanakmal : [1983]140ITR374(MP) which is a Full Bench decision of this court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submitted that as this authority has been wrongly applied while deciding that case, this court should review its earlier order. However, we are unable to agree with this submission as the authority of the Kerala High Court cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is distinguishable and even assuming, as was submitted, that we have referred to a wrong decision, in our opinion, that by itself is not a valid ground to review the order passed earlier.

5. The application is, therefore, dismissed summarily.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //