Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Century Hotels Pvt. Ltd. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Petition No. 341 of 1982
Judge
Reported in[1992]197ITR282(KAR); [1992]197ITR282(Karn)
ActsIncome Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 143(3), 217 and 256(2)
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax
RespondentCentury Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
Appellant AdvocateH. Raghavendra Rao, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateP.A. Bhat, Adv.
Excerpt:
.....them from interfering with taking of the yield of fruits from mango trees grown in the lands in question - defendants suit for declaration that the registered sale deed dated 18.2.1987 as null and void - transfer of land covered under the ptcl act - held, though the said transaction is described as sale and though the document is described as sale deed in substance the said transaction was one of usufructuary mortgage with possession of the said land and the said mango trees grown thereon entitling the plaintiff to enjoy te fruits of the said trees for a period of 40 years from the date of the document and as such the said document could only be a mortgage deed in substance and not a sale deed. the transaction was transfer within the meaning of section 3(e) of the ptcl act. section..........section 143(3) ?' 2.a similar request made before the tribunal has been rejected on the ground that the matter has been concluded by the decision of this court in cit v. executors of the estate of late h. h. rajkuverba dowager maharani saheb of gondal : [1978]115itr301(kar) . it is not disputed that the matter is concluded by the said decision. we asked learned counsel for the department whether that judgment has been taken in appeal before the supreme court counsel is not able to supply us with any precise information. the question raised is, therefore, really academic. 3. civil petition is, therefore, rejected.
Judgment:

K. Jagannatha Shetty, J.

1. The Department seeks a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the following question :

'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee should be given an opportunity of being heard before levying interest under section 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even where the assessment is concluded under section 143(3) ?'

2.A similar request made before the Tribunal has been rejected on the ground that the matter has been concluded by the decision of this court in CIT v. Executors of the Estate of Late H. H. Rajkuverba Dowager Maharani Saheb of Gondal : [1978]115ITR301(KAR) . It is not disputed that the matter is concluded by the said decision. We asked learned counsel for the Department whether that judgment has been taken in appeal before the Supreme Court Counsel is not able to supply us with any precise information. The question raised is, therefore, really academic.

3. Civil petition is, therefore, rejected.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //