The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax­1 vs M/s. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd.

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax­1  vs M/s. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd. 

Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले


NON­REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2659 OF 2022
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax­1      ..Appellant (S)
Versus
M/s. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd.                   ..Respondent (S)
J U D G M E N T 
M. R. Shah, J.
1. Feeling   aggrieved   and   dissatisfied   with   impugned   order
dated 01.10.2020/02.12.2020 (modification order) passed
by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat at
Ahmedabad in R/Tax Appeal No. 278 of 2020, by which
the High Court has dismissed the said appeal preferred by
the appellant herein – Revenue, the present appeal has
been preferred by the Revenue. 
2. As per the office report the respondent is served. From the
office report, it appears that the respondent – assessee
sent a letter to the Registry of this Court on 22.10.2021 to
grant   an   adjournment   of   three   months.   The   time   was
accordingly granted. Despite the same no one has filed
1
vakalatnama   and   none   has   appeared   on   behalf   of   the
respondent. Hence, service of notice on the respondent is
complete. 
3. By the impugned order the High Court has dismissed the
said appeal simply by observing that none of the questions
as   proposed   by   the   revenue   could   be   termed   as   the
substantial   questions   of   law   and   all   the   questions
proposed are on factual aspects of the matter. However, it
is   required   to   be   noted   that   except   re­producing   the
proposed questions of law, there is no further discussion
on the factual matrix of the case. While issuing the notice,
this Court passed the following order: ­ 
“Mr. Balbir Singh, learned ASG, has vehemently submitted that
in the impugned order except narrating the proposed questions of
law, there is no independent reasoning given by the High Court while
dismissing the appeal except recording that “having gone through
the   materials   on   record,   we   are   of   the   view   that   none   of   the
questions   as   proposed   by   the   revenue   could   be   termed   as   the
substantial   questions   of   law.   All   the   questions   proposed   are   on
factual aspects of the matter”. 
Hence,   issue   notice   for   final   disposal   returnable   within   six
weeks.
Counter be filed within four weeks from the date of receipt of the
notice. 
Dasti, in addition, is permitted.”    
3.1 As the impugned order passed by the High Court is a nonspeaking and non­reasoned order and even the submissions
2
on behalf of the revenue are not recorded, the impugned
order passed by the High Court dismissing the appeal is
unsustainable. 
3.2 Under  the  circumstances,  the  impugned   order  is   hereby
quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the High
Court   to   decide   and   dispose   of   the   appeal   afresh   in
accordance with law and on its own merits. If the High
Court is of the opinion that the proposed questions of law
are not substantial questions of law and they are on factual
aspects, it will be open for the High Court to consider the
same in accordance with law, however, the High Court to
pass   a   speaking   and   reasoned   order   after   recording   the
submissions made on behalf of the respective parties. 
4. The present appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. No
costs.     
…………………………………J.
                (M. R. SHAH)
…………………………………J.
 (B.V. NAGARATHNA)
New Delhi, 
April 07, 2022.
3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

संविधान की प्रमुख विशेषताओं का उल्लेख | Characteristics of the Constitution of India

100 Questions on Indian Constitution for UPSC 2020 Pre Exam

भारतीय संविधान से संबंधित 100 महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न उतर