Income Tax Act, 1961: ss. 260-A, 260-A(3), 260-A(4) – Appeal to High Court – Formulation of substantial question of law – On facts, non-formulation of any substantial question of law by the High Court as required to be framed u/s.260-A – Held: Questions framed by the High Court were not as was required to be framed u/s 260-A(3) for hearing the appeal but were the questions urged by the appellant – There lies a distinction between the questions proposed by the appellant for admission of the appeal and the questions framed by the Court – Questions, which are proposed by the appellant, fall u/s 260-A(2)(c) whereas the questions framed by the High Court fall u/s 260-A(3) – Appeal is heard on merits only on the questions framed by the High Court u/s. 260-A(3) as provided u/s. 260-A (4) – Further, if the High Court was of the view that the appeal did not involve any substantial question of law, it should have recorded a categorical finding to that effect and dismissed the appeal in limine – However, the High Court without admitting the appeal and framing any question of law, issued notice of appeal to the assessee, heard both the parties on the questions urged by the appellant and dismissed it – Thus, the High Court did not decide the appeal in conformity with the mandatory procedure prescribed in s.260-A – High Court should have seen that the substantial questions of law did arise in the appeal for being answered on their respective merits – Matter remanded to the High Court to answer the questions framed by this Court u/s. 260-A(3) of the Act.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.