Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vijaya Productions (P) Ltd. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberT.C.P. Nos. 25 to 28 of 1981
Judge
Reported in[1985]152ITR616(Mad)
ActsIncome Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 154 and 155
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax
RespondentVijaya Productions (P) Ltd.
Appellant AdvocateJ. Jayaraman, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateM. Uttama Reddi, Adv.
Excerpt:
- .....the order under s. 155 of the act was invalid. when the department demanded a case against the tribunal's decision the tribunal refused to state a case. in t.c.ps. nos. 404 to 411 of 1980 [cit v. vijaya productions, p. ltd. (supra p. 613)], this court rejected the department's request to direct the tribunal to state a case. thus final quietus has been given to the proceedings of the ito under s. 155. 2. acting under the impression that his order under s. 155 of the act was valued, but it contained only an error the ito purported to make a rectification in it by an order under s. 154 of the act. the correctness of this order under s. 154 was also the subject-matter of an appeal before the tribunal by the assessee. the tribunal, for reasons stated by them, held that the rectification.....
Judgment:

Bhlasubrahmanyan, J.

1. The ITO purported to withdrawn the development rebate originally granted by hims to the assessee for the assessment year 1965-66 to 1967-68 and 1969-70, by an order passed by him under s. 155 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The validity of that order was questioned by the assessee. The Tribunal held that the order under s. 155 of the Act was invalid. When the Department demanded a case against the Tribunal's decision the Tribunal refused to state a case. In T.C.Ps. Nos. 404 to 411 of 1980 [CIT v. Vijaya Productions, P. LTD. (supra p. 613)], this court rejected the Department's request to direct the Tribunal to state a case. Thus final quietus has been given to the proceedings of the ITO under s. 155.

2. Acting under the impression that his order under s. 155 of the Act was valued, but it contained only an error the ITO purported to make a rectification in it by an order under s. 154 of the Act. The correctness of this order under s. 154 was also the subject-matter of an appeal before the Tribunal by the assessee. The Tribunal, for reasons stated by them, held that the rectification order cannot be sustained since the original order under s. 155 was itself found to be notion accordance with law. Against this decision of the Tribunal, the Department sought a reference. The Tribunal declined to state a case. The Department have now come before this court with a request that the Tribunal may be directed to state a case. We think this request must be rejected. As already stated. T.C.Ps. Nos. 404 to 411 of 1980 relating to the parent order under s. 155 were dismissed on the ground that no question of law arose out of the Tribunal's decision. The proceedings under s. 154 for rectification can have legs to stand upon only if the order under s. 155 itself is in existence. Since that order has been set aside and that had become final, these T.C.Ps. concerning the applicability of s. 154 are to no purpose. Hence, they are dismissed on the ground that no referable question of law arises in these cases.


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