The High Court declined to call for a reference of the following question proposed by the Revenue
"Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the surplus realised on sale of shares is a capital gain exempt under s. 47(iv) of the Act." *
It did so because the question was covered by its decision in the case of CIT vs. Sercon (P) Ltd. It appears from the record that the Revenue had approached this Court in a special leave petition against the decision of the High Court in the case of Sercon (P) Ltd. vs. CIT but that special leave petition was dismissed on the ground that no statement of case had been filed. It is clear that the question raises mixed issues of fact and law and that, therefore, it should be considered by the High Court
The appeal is accordingly allowed. The order under challenge is set aside. The Tribunal shall refer the question quoted above to the High Court for its consideration after drawing up a statement of case
No order as to costs.
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Leena Investment Private Limited
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Leena Investment Private Limited
(Supreme Court Of India)
Civil Appeal No. 3285 Of 1998 | 16-11-2000
Advocate List
Bench
- HON'BLE JUSTICE D. P. MOHAPATRA
- HON'BLE JUSTICE S. N. PHUKAN
- HON'BLE JUSTICE S. P. BHARUCHA
Eq Citations
- [2002] 256 ITR 798
- (2001) 10 SCC 234
- LQ/SC/2000/1733
Head Note
Income Tax — Appeal to High Court — Mixed questions of fact and law — Question of law and fact raised in appeal — Validity of — Held, Tribunal to refer question to High Court for its consideration — Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss. 252 and 253
