RAMONA MASSAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner takes time to consider the legal issues involved, particularly in the context of the ratio rendered in the judgment reported at (1976) 1 SCC 916 (ITO, Shillong v. R. Takin Roy Rymbai).

(2.) It is evident, inter alia, from paragraphs 23 and 26 of the judgment in Rymbai that the Supreme Court did not accept the argument that the members of the scheduled tribes were exempted as a class from income-tax. On the contrary, the Supreme Court held that conditions as imposed by sub-clause (a) in Sec. 10(26) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 were permissible.

(3.) However, the petitioner seeks leave to file her returns as sought by the Department, without prejudice to her rights and contentions in the present proceedings.