Click Here For Best Books On Taxation & Law. Upto 60% Off On Select Titles. Free Shipping & Pay On Delivery!
 

Click Here To Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter

This section is now closed. Click here for new judgements

Home › All Judgements › CIT vs. Raval Tiles & Vijayjyot (Bombay High Court)

CIT vs. Raval Tiles & Vijayjyot (Bombay High Court)

Posted on by editor
COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 21, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:

Where the Tribunal did not pass an order on the appeal despite considerable delay and instead fixed the matter repeatedly for ‘clarifications’ and thereafter closed the matter for orders on the basis of written submissions and without hearing the assessee, HELD the procedure followed by the Tribunal was not in compliance with the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal should decide the matter within a reasonable time of the hearing and in case they are not in a position to pass the order within a reasonable period, they should fix the matter for rehearing and not only for calling for clarification on certain points.

See also: Pradeep Sangodkar vs. State (Bom-Goa): Delay in passing judicial orders deprecated.

Related Judgements

  1. CIT vs. Nicholas Piramal (Bombay High Court) 

    As s. 192 requires the employer to deduct tax on the “estimated income” of the employee, the test is whether he acted in a bona fide and honest manner. Where the employer allowed the employees deduction under sections 10(5) and 10(14) only on the basis of declarations filed by…
  2. CIT vs. Eicher Ltd (Delhi High Court) 

    Non-compete compensation paid to an employee for an indefinite period is business expenditure and not capital expenditure as no capital asset or benefit of enduring benefit came into existence. While the lenght of the period of the covenant is important, it is not decisive. What is more important is…
  3. CIT vs. Dodsal Ltd (Bombay High Court) 

    It is not possible to accept the submission of the Revenue that once the AO comes to the conclusion that there is a breach of the mandate of Section 158BFA(1), then the penalty has to be mandatorily imposed. The terminology of section 158BFA makes it clear that the AO…
  4. Mahendra D. Jain vs. ITO (Bombay High Court) 

    Where the assessee is carrying on an illegal activity which is treated as a business, any loss arising in such business as a result of confiscation by the authorities is an allowable loss. However, where the assessee is carrying on a lawful business, any loss arising as a result…
  5. CIT vs. Wallfort Shares & Stocks (Bombay High Court) 

    Where the assessee bought units of a mutual fund, received tax-free dividend thereon and immediately thereafter redeemed the units and claimed the difference between the cost price and redemption value as a loss and the same had been upheld by … CIT vs. Wallfort Shares & Stocks (Bombay…
0 comments on “CIT vs. Raval Tiles & Vijayjyot (Bombay High Court)”
1 Pings/Trackbacks for "CIT vs. Raval Tiles & Vijayjyot (Bombay High Court)"
  1. archives » Blog Archive » Shivsagar Veg vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court) says:
    December 4, 2008 at 12:00 pm

    […] Also: Raval Tiles & Vijay Jyot (Bom). Posted in All Judgements, High Court […]