2001 PLP 2472 (PTD)
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus VXL INDIA LTD
| Citation | 2001 PLP 2472 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | 247 I T R 820 |
| Bench Members | S. P. Bharucha and D.P. Mohapatra, JJ |
| Parties | ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus VXL INDIA LTD |
| Primary Law | Income-tax |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 2472 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income-tax as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 2472 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the 247 I T R 820 bench comprising: S. P. Bharucha and D.P. Mohapatra, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 2472 (PTD) (ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus VXL INDIA LTD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Harish Salve, Solicitor-General of India (Ranbir Chandra and Ms. Sushma Suri, Advocates with him) for Appellant.
- Joseph Vellapally, Senior Advocate (Bhargava V. Desai and Ms. Kumud Singh, Advocates with him) for Respondent.
- Harish Salve, Solicitor‑General of India (Ranbir Chandra and Ms. Sushma Suri, Advocates with him) for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
(Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order, dated April 26, 1995 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No.6291 of 1994).
Reassessment
Material to support relief that there was excessive allowance of loss or depreciation in original assessment-- Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss. 147 &
148. From the decision of the Gujarat High Court (see (1995) 215 ITR 295) to the effect that, since the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer did not disclose the basis for holding the belief that excessive loss or depreciation had been allowed in the original assessment, the notice to reopen the assessment was liable to be quashed, the Department preferred an appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for consideration and clarifying that the assessee would be entitled to raise all available contentions before the Assessing Officer and in proceedings thereafter. VXL India Ltd. v. Assistant CIT (1995) 215 ITR 295 set aside and matter remanded to the Assessing Officer.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑Reassessment‑‑‑Condition precedent‑‑‑Material to support relief that there was excessive allowance of loss or depreciation in original assessment‑‑ Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss. 147 &
148. From the decision of the Gujarat High Court (see (1995) 215 ITR 295) to the effect that, since the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer did not disclose the basis for holding the belief that excessive loss or depreciation had been allowed in the original assessment, the notice to reopen the assessment was liable to be quashed, the Department preferred an appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for consideration and clarifying that the assessee would be entitled to raise all available contentions before the Assessing Officer and in proceedings thereafter. VXL India Ltd. v. Assistant CIT (1995) 215 ITR 295 set aside and matter remanded to the Assessing Officer. Harish Salve, Solicitor‑General of India (Ranbir Chandra and Ms. Sushma Suri, Advocates with him) for Appellant. Joseph Vellapally, Senior Advocate (Bhargava V. Desai and Ms. Kumud Singh, Advocates with him) for Respondent. The appeal has been heard for some time, Counsel are now agreed that the judgment and order under appeal should be set aside and that the matter should now be considered by the Assessing Authority. The appeal is allowed. The order under appeal is set aside. It is made clear that the assessee shall be entitled to raise all available contentions before the Assessing Authority and in proceedings thereafter. No order as to costs. M.B.A./1003/FC Appeal allowed.