Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kalinga Tubes Ltd. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....appeal shall lie. even otherwise, the word judgment as defined under section 2(9) means a statement given by a judge on the grounds of a decree or order. thus the contention that against an order passed by a single judge in an appeal filed under section 104 c.p.c., a further appeal lies to a division bench cannot be accepted. the newly incorporated section 100a in clear and specific terms prohibits further appeal against the decree and judgment or order of a single judge to a division bench notwithstanding anything contained in the letters patent. the letters patent which provides for further appeal to a division bench remains intact, but the right to prefer a further appeal is taken away even in respect of the matters arising under the special enactments or other instruments having the force of law be it against original/appellate decree or order heard and decided by a single judge. it has to be kept in mind that the special statute only provide for an appeal to the high court. it has not made any provision for filing appeal to a division bench against the judgment or decree or order of a single judge. no letters patent appeal shall lie against a judgment/order passed by a.....order of tribunal--validity.ratio :the order of the tribunal offering remand of case by commissioner(appeals) was neither vitiated in law by reason of it having ignored the relevant and admissible evidence nor it was based on wrong appreciation of facts and evidence, hence legally acceptable. facts :the assessing officer inter alia, added rs. 36,216 on account of sale of rejected black pipes, rs. 1,90,410 in respect of sale of g. i. pipes and rs. 1,18,570 representing fictitious purchases from certain parties. the commissioner (appeals) deleted the additions. the matter was remanded by the commissioner (appeals) and this was affirmed by the tribunal. held :the orders are neither contrary to nor inconsistent with the provisions of law or materials on record. application :also to current assessment years.a. y. :1963-64income tax act 1961 s.254

Judgment:

ORDER

OF TRIBUNAL--Validity.

Ratio :

The order of the Tribunal offering remand of case by Commissioner(Appeals) was neither vitiated in law by reason of it having ignored the relevant and admissible evidence nor it was based on wrong appreciation of facts and evidence, hence legally acceptable.

Facts :

The assessing officer inter alia, added Rs. 36,216 on account of sale of rejected black pipes, Rs. 1,90,410 in respect of sale of G. I. pipes and Rs. 1,18,570 representing fictitious purchases from certain parties. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the additions. The matter was remanded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and this was affirmed by the Tribunal.

Held :

The orders are neither contrary to nor inconsistent with the provisions of law or materials on record.

Application :

Also to current assessment years.

A. Y. :

1963-64

Income Tax Act 1961 s.254