Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kalawati - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
in the supreme court of india s.p. bharucha, m.b. shah & shivaraj v. patil, jj. - code of civil procedure, 1908.[c.a. no. 5/1908]. order 2, rule 2: [dr.arijit pasayat & lokeshwar singh panta, jj] territorial jurisdiction several causes of action breach of agreement suit for damages and breach of contract filed at n , place of manufacturing unit of plaintiff registered office of defendants located at p where agreements were executed other defendants residing at p further term in purchase order restricting jurisdiction to courts at p only order for return of plaint - supreme court permitted plaintiff to file separate suit in relation to purchase orders at p and to make necessary amendments to plaint filed at n and that defendants would be entitled to raise such objections and to.....orderleave granted.2. the notice on the special leave petition stated that the matter might be disposed of at this stage in the fight of the judgment of this court delivered on 1-10-1999 in union of india v. s. muthyam reddy (civil appeal no. 762 of 1997) : [1999]240itr341(sc) .3. the respondent has been served but has not put in an appearance.4. the judgment aforesaid being applicable and in favour of the appellant, the civil appeal is allowed and the judgment and order under appeal is set aside.5. the question that the appellant sought reference of, namely, 'whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned income tax appellate tribunal was correct in holding that the profits arising out of sale of agricultural land could not be subjected to income tax', shall now.....

Judgment:
ORDER

Leave granted.

2. The notice on the Special Leave Petition stated that the matter might be disposed of at this stage in the fight of the judgment of this court delivered on 1-10-1999 in Union of India v. S. Muthyam Reddy (Civil Appeal No. 762 of 1997) : [1999]240ITR341(SC) .

3. The respondent has been served but has not put in an appearance.

4. The judgment aforesaid being applicable and in favour of the appellant, the civil appeal is allowed and the judgment and order under appeal is set aside.

5. The question that the appellant sought reference of, namely, 'whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the profits arising out of sale of agricultural land could not be subjected to income tax', shall now be referred by the Tribunal to the High Court to be decided in the light of the judgment in S. Muthyam Reddy's case (supra) case.

6. No order as to costs.