Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Cwt Vs. Sardar Singh

Cwt vs Sardar Singh

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Sep 26, 2003
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/492719

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Decided On
Case Number
W.T. Ref. No. 200 of 1983 26 September 2003
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Head Note: INCOME TAX WEALTH TAX Reference--QUESTION OF FACTAssessmentHeld: In the absence of any proper explanation given by the assessee, the Tribunal recorded a finding that no benami transaction was involved in the case, this being a finding of fact, no question of law was involved. Wealth Tax Act, 1957 s.27(3)...

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cwt

Respondent

Sardar Singh

Legal References

Reported In
[2005]142TAXMAN90(All)

Excerpt

head note: income tax wealth tax reference--question of factassessmentheld: in the absence of any proper explanation given by the assessee, the tribunal recorded a finding that no benami transaction was involved in the case, this being a finding of fact, no question of law was involved. wealth tax act, 1957 s.27(3) in the allahabad high court m. katju & umeshwar pandey, jj. - land acquisition act, 1894 [c.a. no. 1/1894]. section 4; [sushil harkauli, s.k. singh & krishna murari, jj] acquisition of land held, court cannot issue a writ of mandamus directing the state authorities to acquire a particular land. land acquisition is not purely ministerial act to be performed by executive no direction in nature of mandamus whether interim or final can be issued by court under article 226 necessarily to acquire particular land in public interest. land acquisition is not a purely ministerial act to be performed by the executive and therefore, no mandamus can be issued by the court in exercise of its power under article 226 of the constitution, whether suo motu or otherwise, whether in public interest litigation or otherwise directing acquisition of land under the provisions of land acquisition act, 1894. it would, however, be open to the court in exercise of that power to invite the attention of the executive to any public purpose and the need for land for meeting that public purpose and to require the executive to take a decision, even a reasoned decision, with regard to the same in accordance with the statutory provisions, perhaps even within a reasonable time frame. however, the power of the court under article 226 must necessarily stop at that. thereafter, if the decision taken by the executive is capable of challenge and, there exist appropriate legal grounds for such challenge, it may also be open to the court to quash the decision and to require reconsideration. but no direction in the nature of mandamus whether interim or final can be issued by.....1. this is a wealth tax reference under section 27(3) of the wealth tax act in which the following question has been referred to us for our opinion :'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal could reasonably come to the finding that no benami transaction was involved in this case ?'2. we have perused the appellate order of the tribunal and find no legal infirmity in the same.3. the tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that this is not a case of benami transaction and the assessee has not given a proper explanation. this being a finding of fact, we cannot interfere in this reference.4. the question referred to us is therefore, answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department.

Full Judgment

1. This is a Wealth Tax Reference under section 27(3) of the Wealth Tax Act in which the following question has been referred to us for our opinion :

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal could reasonably come to the finding that no benami transaction was involved in this case ?'

2. We have perused the appellate order of the Tribunal and find no legal infirmity in the same.

3. The Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that this is not a case of Benami transaction and the assessee has not given a proper explanation. This being a finding of fact, we cannot interfere in this reference.

4. The question referred to us is therefore, answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial