Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Sarita Aggarwal and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

head note: income tax reference--question of lawno reference filed against earlier decisions catch note: in circumstance of case, reference is declined because earlier decisions of tribunal on same question remained unchallenged. case law analysis: high court decision affirmed. application: also to current assessment year. decision: in favour of assessee. income tax act 1961 s.256(2) in the supreme court of india s. p. bharucha, n. santosh hegde & y.k. sabharwal, jj. - section 30:[c.k. thacker & d.k. jain, jj] powers of representative union - closure of mill - union considering larger interest accepted certain amount for workers dues, towards full and final settlement held, action of union suffers from no infirmity and cannot be regarded as illegal or otherwise unreasonable. orderby the courtthe high court rejected the application of the revenue to call for a reference of two questions on the ground that no question of law arose. the tribunal, in the revenue's application under section 256(1) of the income tax act, had noted that the questions were covered against the revenue by its earlier decisions, particulars whereof it gave. it also stated that reference applications against those decisions had been moved and had been rejected by the tribunal. it would appear from a statement made by learned counsel for the revenue before the tribunal that in respect of these questions an application under section 256(2) had been moved but counsel for the revenue cannot tell us what happened thereafter. and the assessee has filed an affidavit to state that it has no information in this behalf.2. having regard to the fact that, under these circumstances, the earlier decisions of the tribunal on the same question remain unchallenged, these appeals and the special leave petitions are dismissed with costs.

Judgment:

ORDER

By the Court

The High Court rejected the application of the revenue to call for a reference of two questions on the ground that no question of law arose. The Tribunal, in the revenue's application under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, had noted that the questions were covered against the Revenue by its earlier decisions, particulars whereof it gave. It also stated that reference applications against those decisions had been moved and had been rejected by the Tribunal. It would appear from a statement made by learned counsel for the revenue before the Tribunal that in respect of these questions an application under section 256(2) had been moved but counsel for the revenue cannot tell us what happened thereafter. And the assessee has filed an affidavit to state that it has no information in this behalf.

2. Having regard to the fact that, under these circumstances, the earlier decisions of the Tribunal on the same question remain unchallenged, these appeals and the Special Leave Petitions are dismissed with costs.