(A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.)
Commissioner of Income Tax _______________________ Appellant
v.
M/s. Pix Transmission Ltd. _______________________ Respondent
Civil Appeal No(s). 9674/2010, decided on July 13, 2017
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. In the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax/Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the following substantial question of law was raised:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the claim of the assessee under Section 88-HHC of the Income Tax Act is justified even if he had not furnished the report of an accountant along with the return of income.”
2. The High Court has, however, dismissed the appeal with a simple observation that no substantial question of law is involved.
3. After hearing Mr. Sanghi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Revenue, we are of the opinion that the question formulated above is a substantial question of law which arises for determination and, therefore, the High Court should not have dismissed the appeal of the Revenue in limine.
4. Having regard to the fact that it is an old matter, we could have decided the aforesaid question of law ourselves. However, since the respondent has not put any appearance, we are refrained from adopting the aforesaid course of action.
5. We, thus, allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order of the High Court and remand the case back to the High Court to decide the aforesaid question of law after hearing both the parties.
Civil Appeal No(s). 9674/2010
Commissioner of Income Tax _________________________ Appellant
v.
M/s. Pix Transmission Ltd ___________________________ Respondent
Date : 13-07-2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
(Before A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.)
For Appellant(s) Mr. A.K. Sanghi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. H. Raghavendra Rao, Adv.
Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Adv.
Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
Order
6. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
7. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
———
