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. Brig. Kapil Mohan

Cit vs Brig. Kapil Mohan

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided May 31, 2001
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/710152

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
Delhi High Court
Decided On
Case Number
IT Reference No. 144 of 1995 31 May 2001
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

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

In the Delhi High Court Arijit Pasayat, C. J. & D.K. Jain, J. ?A. Y. 1986-87 -

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cit

Advocate R.C. Pandey and; Ms. Prem Lata Bansal,;for the Revenu

Respondent

Brig. Kapil Mohan

Legal References

Reported In
[2001]119TAXMAN226(Delhi)

Excerpt

in the delhi high court arijit pasayat, c. j. & d.k. jain, j. ?a. y. 1986-87 - heard the learned counsel for the revenue.at the instance of the revenue following questions have been referred under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961 i(hereinafter referred to as the act) for opinion of this court :'1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income tax appellate tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of section 64(2) of the income tax act, 1961 did not apply to the shares received by the assessed and thereby deleting the dividend income of rs. 47,757 from his taxable income 2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income tax appellate tribunal was justified in holding that the trust settled for the benefit of the sole beneficiary, 1st son of shri rakesh mohan who was unborn at the time of creation of the trust, is a valid trust.'2. the dispute relates to the assessment year 1986-87.3. so far as the first issue is concerned, our judgment in cwt/cit v. lt. col. kapil mohan : [2001]251itr386(delhi) will cover this case also. directions given for rehearing by the tribunal on the factual aspects shall also govern this question. so far as the second question is concerned, we had occasion to deal with the similar issue in cit v. brig. kapil mohan (2001) 252 itr 830 , which will govern this question also. the answer to the question would be in the affirmative, in favor of the assessed and against the revenue.4. reference is disposed of accordingly.

Full Judgment

Heard the learned counsel for the revenue.

At the instance of the revenue following questions have been referred under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 I(hereinafter referred to as the Act) for opinion of this court :

'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of section 64(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 did not apply to the shares received by the assessed and thereby deleting the dividend income of Rs. 47,757 from his taxable income

2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the trust settled for the benefit of the sole beneficiary, 1st son of Shri Rakesh Mohan who was unborn at the time of creation of the trust, is a valid trust.'

2. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1986-87.

3. So far as the first issue is concerned, our judgment in CWT/CIT v. Lt. Col. Kapil Mohan : [2001]251ITR386(Delhi) will cover this case also. Directions given for rehearing by the Tribunal on the factual aspects shall also govern this question. So far as the second question is concerned, we had occasion to deal with the similar issue in CIT v. Brig. Kapil Mohan (2001) 252 ITR 830 , which will govern this question also. The answer to the question would be in the affirmative, in favor of the assessed and against the revenue.

4. Reference is disposed of accordingly.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial