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.

Cit Vs. Smt. Sukhrani Devi

Cit vs Smt. Sukhrani Devi

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Feb 04, 2004
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/495011

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
IT Reference No. 119 of 1984 4 February 2004
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

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

Head Note: INCOME TAX Revision under section 263--POWERS OF CITMatters not considered and decided in appealHeld: Powers of CIT under section 263 after amendment by Finance Act, 1989 with retrospective effect, shall extend and shall be deemed to have extended to matters not considered and decided in appeal filed by a...

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cit

Respondent

Smt. Sukhrani Devi

Legal References

Reported In
[2004]141TAXMAN354(All)

Excerpt

head note: income tax revision under section 263--powers of citmatters not considered and decided in appealheld: powers of cit under section 263 after amendment by finance act, 1989 with retrospective effect, shall extend and shall be deemed to have extended to matters not considered and decided in appeal filed by assessee before the cit(a). income tax act, 1961 s.263 in the allahabad high court dr. b.s. chauhan & ghanshyam dass, jj. - indian penal code, 1860 [c.a. no. 45/1860]. section 302; [m.c. jain, r.c. deepak & k.k. misra, jj] murder plea as to accused being minor school register and transfer certificate not proved before court according to law held, it has to be ignored and question of age is to be determined on other evidence and circumstances surfacing on record. age determined on the basis of x-ray plates and report prepared by c.m.o., is the correct age of accused. accused was declared to be child on the date of commission of offence of murder. however, considering fact that now accused was around 41 years, he cannot be sent to approved school. accused was directed to pay fine of rs.25,000/- under section 302 i.p.c., amount of fine was directed to be paid as compensation to wife of deceased. mohammadorderaffidavit of service has been filed today. it appears that the assessee has been served but none appeared on behalf of the assessee.2. in this reference, following question has been referred to under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961, for our opinion :'whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned tribunal was legally justified in upholding the appellate assistant commissioners order cancelling the assessment orders framed by the income tax officer for the assessment years in question'. 3. the case is squarely covered by the judgment of the honble supreme court and the question referred for our opinion, has already been answered by the apex court in hindustan aeronautics ltd. v. cit : [2000]243itr808(sc) and cit v. shri arbuda mills ltd. (1998) 231 itr 502, wherein the apex court considered the scope and effect of the amendment of section 263(1) by finance act, 1989 with retrospective effect and held that the powers of commissioner of income tax shall extend and shall be deemed to have extended to matters not considered and decided in appeal filed by assessee before the commissioner of income tax.4. thus, in view of the above, we answer the reference in negative i.e., in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Affidavit of service has been filed today. It appears that the assessee has been served but none appeared on behalf of the assessee.

2. In this reference, following question has been referred to under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for our opinion :

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was legally justified in upholding the Appellate Assistant Commissioners order cancelling the assessment orders framed by the Income Tax Officer for the assessment years in question'. 3. The case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court and the question referred for our opinion, has already been answered by the Apex Court in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. v. CIT : [2000]243ITR808(SC) and CIT v. Shri Arbuda Mills Ltd. (1998) 231 ITR 502, wherein the Apex Court considered the scope and effect of the amendment of section 263(1) by Finance Act, 1989 with retrospective effect and held that the powers of Commissioner of Income Tax shall extend and shall be deemed to have extended to matters not considered and decided in appeal filed by assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax.

4. Thus, in view of the above, we answer the Reference in negative i.e., in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial