Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
WTR/3/1998 2/ 2 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
WEALTH
TAX REFERENCE No. 3 of 1998
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
HONOURABLE
MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
COMMISSIONER
OF WEALTH TAX - Applicant(s)
Versus
INDULAL
NARANDAS PATEL (HUF) - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
MANISH R BHATT for
Applicant(s) : 1,
SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
and
HONOURABLE
MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
Date
: 14/06/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI)
The
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench A has, in this
consolidated reference in relation to Assessment Years 1972-73 to
1975-76, referred the following question for the opinion of this
Court at the instance of the revenue:
Whether,
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was
right in law in setting aside the order of penalty u/s 18(1)(a) of
the Wealth Tax Act?
Before
entering into the merits of the case, on a perusal of the orders of
penalty, it is noticed that the penalty imposed for Assessment Year
1973-74 was Rs.340/-, for Assessment Year 1974-75 was Rs.11,880/-
and for Assessment Year 1975-76 was Rs.3,190/-.
Considering
the amount of penalty involved, this Court is not inclined to go
into the merits of the Reference. The question is, accordingly,
left unanswered. The Reference is disposed of accordingly.
[D.A.MEHTA,
J.]
[HARSHA
DEVANI, J.]
parmar*
Top