ACIT Vs. PATEL SPECIFIC FAMILY TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 1st March 1999, the Court made an order "admit". Hence, when the Tax Appeal was called out for hearing today, a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the respondent, based on provisions of Section 260-A (4) of Income Tax Act 1961 ("the Act"), to submit that, under sub section (3) of Section 260-A of the Act, an appeal can be heard only after a substantial question of law is formulated by the High Court, and the said provision requires that a substantial question of law must be formulated by the High Court. That, in the present case, in absence of any questions of law having been formulated, the respondent is entitled to urge that the questions as proposed in the memorandum of appeal are not substantial questions of law.

(2.) AS against that, the learned counsel for the Appellant Revenue submitted that, in the memorandum of appeal in paragraph no. 7, two questions have been proposed by the appellant when the Tax Appeal was filed, and it should mean that at the time of admission, the appeal has been admitted on the questions so proposed and the said questions are deemed to have been formulated by the High Court, hence the appeal should be heard on merits of the questions so formulated. Alternatively, it was submitted that it was open to the Court to formulate any other question which the Court feels is required to be determined. The two proposed questions read as under:

(3.) ON behalf of respondent Assessee, learned senior advocate also submitted in support of the preliminary objection that the questions as formulated do not arise out of the Tribunal's order, in as much as, in so far as proposed question no. 2 is concerned, same has not been dealt with by the Tribunal at all, and in so far as the 1st question is concerned, same is a question of fact based on evidence on record.