Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs M/s Gopal Shri Scrips Pvt. Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

12 March 2019

Case No.

Civil Appeal No.2922 of 2019

Bench

Abhay Manohar Sapre, Dinesh Maheshwari

Citation

[2019] 4 S.C.R. 704 : 2019 INSC 351

Headnote

Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.260A and Chapter XV – Companies Act, 1956 – s.560 – High Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that it had become infructuous as the name of the respondentassessee (company) was struck off from the register of the company u/s.560(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 – Propriety of – Held: High Court was wrong in dismissing the appeal rendering it infructuous as it did not decide the appeal keeping in view the two relevant provisions i.e. s.560(5) proviso (a) of the Companies Act and Chapter XV of the Income Tax Act which deals with ‘liability in special cases’ and its clause (L) which deals with ‘discontinuance of business or dissolution’ – These provisions specifically deal with the cases of the Companies, whose name has been struck off u/s. 560(5) of the Companies Act – Thus, order of the High Court not legally sustainable – Accordingly, case remanded to the High Court for deciding the appeal afresh.

Remanding the matter to the High Court, the Court

HELD: 1. The High Court failed to notice Section 560 (5) proviso (a) of the Companies Act and further failed to notice Chapter XV of the Income Tax Act which deals with “liability in special cases” and its clause (L) which deals with “discontinuance of business or dissolution”. [Para 13] [707-D]

2. The aforementioned two provisions, namely, one under the Companies Act and the other under the Income Tax Act specifically deal with the cases of the Companies, whose name has been struck off under Section 560 (5) of the Companies Act. [Para 14] [707-E]

3. These provisions provide as to how and in what manner the liability against such Company arising under the Companies Act, 1956 and under the Income Tax Act, 1961 is required to be dealt with. [Para 15] [707-F]

4. Since the High Court did not decide the appeal keeping in view the aforementioned two relevant provisions, the impugned order is not legally sustainable and has to be set aside. [Para 16] [707-F]

5. The case is remanded to the High Court for deciding the appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law keeping in view the relevant provisions of Companies Act and the Income tax Act. [Para 17] [707-G-H; 708-A]

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 09.08.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur in DBITA No.53 of 2000 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal as having become infructuous filed by the appellant herein. 3. The appeal involves a short question as would be clear from the facts stated infra. 4. The appellant is the Union of India-Income Tax Department. The respondent is the assessee in the appeal out of which this appeal arises. 5. The appellan

View Subscription Plans →