✦ Bombay High Court · 01 Jul 2010

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. M/S SOCIADADE DE FOMENTO

Tax Appeal No. 29 of 2010F M REIS

Case at a glance

Decided
01 Jul 2010
Bench
F M REIS

Outcome

Dismissed

the appeal and accordingly the appeal is dismissed

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 22. The challenge is to the order dated 25th November, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji. The Tribunal held that the block assessment order passed in the respondent assesse's case for the block period 1st April, 1990 to 13th September, 2000 is…
  • Para 44. A Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court in the case of Smt. Bandana Gogoi Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2207) 289 ITR (GUJ) held that the provisions of section 143(2) of the said Act will be mandantorily applicable in the case…
  • Para 55. Therefore, we find that no substantial question of law arises in the appeal and accordingly the appeal is dismissed. A. S. OKA, J. F. M. REIS, J. ap/-

Judgment

We have heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant in support of this appeal under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,

2.

The challenge is to the order dated 25th November, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji. The Tribunal held that the block assessment order passed in the respondent assesse's case for the block period 1st April, 1990 to 13th September, 2000 is abinitio void. It was held that the requirement of section 143(2) of the said Act of 1961 was mandatory, which is applicable in the case of block assessment.

3.

The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the question of law is whether the requirement of section 143(2) of the said Act of 1961 will apply while concluding the block assessment.

4.

A Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court in the case of Smt. Bandana Gogoi Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2207) 289 ITR (GUJ) held that the provisions of section 143(2) of the said Act will be mandantorily applicable in the case of block assessment also. We find that the view taken by the Gauhati High Court has been approved by the Division Bench of this High Court in the case of CWT vs. J.M. Scindia (HUF) dated 5th February, 2008 in Wealth Tax Appeal No.1001 of 2007. In paragraph 8 of the said decision, the view of Gauhati High Court has been upheld.

Operative part

5.

Therefore, we find that no substantial question of law arises in the appeal and accordingly the appeal is dismissed. A. S. OKA, J. F. M. REIS, J. ap/-

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: the appeal and accordingly the appeal is dismissed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 01 Jul 2010. The bench was F M REIS.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Tax Appeal No. 29 of 2010). ← Search more judgments