PTD 2000

2000 PLP 2445 (PTD)

Dr. K. L. BATRA Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Jurisdiction / Court
236 I T R 184
Decided Date
Income-tax Reference No.90 of 1993, decided on 30th July, 1997.
Honorable Judges
Ashok Bhan and N. K. Agrawal, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2000 PLP 2445 (PTD)
Forum / Court 236 I T R 184
Bench Members Ashok Bhan and N. K. Agrawal, JJ
Parties Dr. K. L. BATRA Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Primary Law Income-tax
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP 2445 (PTD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Income-tax as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP 2445 (PTD)?

The case was heard and decided by the 236 I T R 184 bench comprising: Ashok Bhan and N. K. Agrawal, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 2445 (PTD) (Dr. K. L. BATRA Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Income-tax

Representation

  • B. S. Gupta, Senior Advocate with Sanjay Barisal for the Commissioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Reference

Penalty

Concealment of income

Assessee whether liable to pay penalty

Question of law

Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.256 & 271(1)(c). Held, that the question whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was liable to penalty under section 271(I)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1985-86 had to be referred. A. K. Mittal for the Assessee. B. S. Gupta, Senior Advocate with Sanjay Barisal for the Commissioner. JUDGMENT ASHOK BHAN, J.

This petition has been filed by the assessee under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking a mandamus directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as' "the Tribunal"), to draw up a statement of the case and refer the following question of law, arising from the order of the Tribunal, dated June 15, 1992, to this Court for its opinion: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in having determined the concealed income of the assessee at Rs.70,000 for the assessment year 1985-86 and in having held that the assessee was liable to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act on this amount?" After hearing counsel for the parties and on perusal of the order of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the following refrained question of law, does arise from the order of the Tribunal: "Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was liable to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1985-86?" Accordingly, we direct the Tribunal to draw up the statement of the case and refer the aforesaid question of law to this Court for its opinion. M.B.A/4124/FC Order accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

ASHOK BHAN, J.

This petition has been filed by the assessee under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking a mandamus directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as' "the Tribunal"), to draw up a statement of the case and refer the following question of law, arising from the order of the Tribunal, dated June 15, 1992, to this Court for its opinion: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in having determined the concealed income of the assessee at Rs.70,000 for the assessment year 1985-86 and in having held that the assessee was liable to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act on this amount?" After hearing counsel for the parties and on perusal of the order of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the following refrained question of law, does arise from the order of the Tribunal: "Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was liable to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1985-86?" Accordingly, we direct the Tribunal to draw up the statement of the case and refer the aforesaid question of law to this Court for its opinion. M.B.A/4124/FC Order accordingly.