Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Laxmi Wine Merchants - Court Judgment |
| Direct Taxation |
| Supreme Court of India |
| Dec-06-2000 |
| S.P. Bharucha,; N. Santosh Hegde and; Y.K. Sabharwal, JJ. |
| [2001]251ITR882(SC); (2002)9SCC621 |
| Income-tax Act, 1961 - Sections 185 and 256; Andhra Pradesh Foreign Liquor and Indian Liquor Rules, 1970 - Rules 38 and 39 |
| Commissioner of Income-tax |
| Laxmi Wine Merchants |
| S. Ganesh,; Rajiv Nanda,; S.K. Dwivedi,; |
| L. Nageswara Rao, Sr. Adv., ; S.K. Verma and ; V.G. Pragasam |
- order1. the high court declined to call for a reference of the following question :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to the benefits of registration in spite of contravention of rules 38 and 39 of the a. p. foreign liquor and indian liquor rules, 1970 ?'2. it did so because of an earlier decision in c1t v. nalli venkataramana : [1984]145itr759(ap) . the revenue is, therefore, in appeal by special leave. the decision of the high court in the case of nalli venkataramana : [1984]145itr759(ap) was considered by this court in bihari lal jaiswal v. cit : [1996]217itr746(sc) and was found unacceptable. it is, therefore, clear that a question of law does arise which requires the consideration of the high court, in the light of the judgment of this court in the case of bihari lal jaiswal : [1996]217itr746(sc) .3. the civil appeals are allowed. the order under appeal is set aside. thetribunal shall refer to the high court the question aforestated, havingdrawn up a statement of case.4. no order as to costs.
ORDER
1. The High Court declined to call for a reference of the following question :
'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to the benefits of registration in spite of contravention of rules 38 and 39 of the A. P. Foreign Liquor and Indian Liquor Rules, 1970 ?'
2. It did so because of an earlier decision in C1T v. Nalli Venkataramana : [1984]145ITR759(AP) . The Revenue is, therefore, in appeal by special leave. The decision of the High Court in the case of Nalli Venkataramana : [1984]145ITR759(AP) was considered by this court in Bihari Lal Jaiswal v. CIT : [1996]217ITR746(SC) and was found unacceptable. It is, therefore, clear that a question of law does arise which requires the consideration of the High Court, in the light of the judgment of this court in the case of Bihari Lal Jaiswal : [1996]217ITR746(SC) .
3. The civil appeals are allowed. The order under appeal is set aside. TheTribunal shall refer to the High Court the question aforestated, havingdrawn up a statement of case.
4. No order as to costs.