Supreme Court dismisses SLP of Income Tax Department against Radhika Roy, wife of NDTV founder Prannoy Roy
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2855 (2019) (04) SC
Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties
Olympia Paper & Stationery Stores vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 63 ITD 148
Lately, in May 2018, the Delhi High Court had set aside the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against NDTV founder Prannoy Roy and his wife Radhika Roy in which, in a very unusual manner, the Tribunal entertained additional documents which were not part of the record.
The Petitioner had filed two petitions challenging the validity of an order made by the Tribunal under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
Before the Hon’ble High Court it was further contended that the ITAT’s opinion that an order directing early hearing is merely administrative was contrary to its own ruling. It was emphasized that for passing any formal order under Rule 29 permitting the additional documents to be brought on record, the Tribunal could not proceed so, as it did.
The Hon’ble High Court had opined that the Tribunal’s observation in the impugned order made in the course of the rectification application i.e. that an order, allowing an application for early hearing, is merely administrative, was clearly incorrect and was accordingly set aside.
The Hon’ble High Court had opined that irrespective of what was apparent even if the documents were produced and in the possession of the ITAT, the question of their being part of the record of the lower appellate authority or the AO did not arise.
The Hon’ble High Court had stressed that the proper procedure prescribed by law had to be followed and this naturally meant that the Revenue had to move a formal application under Rule 29 of the ITAT Procedure Rules to justify the bringing on record of these additional documents in its possession.
Aggrieved by the above orders of the Hon’ble High Court, the Revenue had approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of filing Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) which have been dismissed.
Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App under section 69A of IT Act 2000 is not disproportionate - Delhi HC…
High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA to means a project or an undertaking owned…
Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash and the real owner had come forward owning the cash…
Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…
Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…
CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…