COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. DEVIDAYAL STAINLESS STEEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Tribunal has referred to this Court only one question of law. The question reads thus :

(2.) THE proceedings relate to asst. year 1971 72. The Tribunal held the provisions of S. 140A(3) to be ultra vires following Madras High Court decision in the case of A.M. Sali Maricar vs. ITO (1973) 90 ITR 116 (Mad) : TC9R.651 observing that at the time it was deciding the appeal, there was no decision of any other High Court taking a contrary view.

(3.) SHRI Mandloi, the learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, stated that the question was whether when the Tribunal ignored the provisions of S. 140A(3) as ultra vires, it was justified in doing so. The Tribunal, he pointed out, decided the appeal on 3rd June, 1975. As on that date there was no decision of any High Court where a view contrary to the view taken by the Madras High Court in (1973) 90 ITR 116 : TC9R.651 (supra) was taken. He then placed reliance on our Court's two decisions in the cases of CIT vs. B.B. Poojara (IT Ref. No. 4 of 1975) dt. 22nd Feb., 1984 and CIT vs. Smt. Nirmalabai K. Darekar (IT Ref. No. 342 of 1976) dt. 19th Dec., 1988. In both these cases our Court, following our Court's earlier decision in (1978) 113 ITR 589 (supra), confirmed the Tribunal's order ignoring the provisions of S. 140A(3).