Income Tax

SC dismisses SLP of ITD against Radhika Roy, wife of NDTV founder Prannoy Roy 

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.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

2 hours ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

4 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash withdrawal from bank can’t be taxed u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure – ITAT

Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…

4 days ago