Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + SC Income Tax - 2009 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (8) TMI 71 - SC - Income TaxPartly heard matter by CIT(A) transfer of CIT(A) Mr. Kuntal K. Sen, CIT (A), Central V, Mumbai, who has already heard out the appeal, was under transfer Held that - he has heard out the matter in detail and only the matter is to be decided finally after hearing the heirs and legal representatives of the HSM - Mr. Kuntal K. Sen should be allowed to stay for a period of six months from this date to hear out the Income Tax Appeal and dispose of the same finally CIT(A) directed to dispose of the Income Tax Appeal pending before it within six months from this date without granting any unnecessary adjournment whatsoever - broker Harshad Shantilal Mehta (HSM)
Issues:
Interim order of Special Court regarding distribution of diverted funds, permission to withdraw decretal amount, stay for CIT (A) to hear out Income Tax Appeal, direction for timely disposal of appeal. Interim Order of Special Court: The Standard Chartered Bank challenged an interim order of the Special Court at Mumbai regarding the distribution of funds diverted to the accounts of a broker. The Special Court decided to wait for the decision of the CIT (Appeals) on the broker's liability to income tax before distributing the funds. The Supreme Court upheld the Special Court's decision, stating that the appellant-Bank cannot withdraw the amount until the final adjudication by the CIT (A) is completed. Permission to Withdraw Decretal Amount: The heirs and legal representatives of the broker expressed their intention to file documents and argue the case within four months without seeking adjournments. Based on this commitment, the Supreme Court dismissed the Bank's applications seeking permission to withdraw the decretal amount from the custodian. The Court found no reason to pass any order on the applications in light of the heirs' stand. Stay for CIT (A) to Hear Out Income Tax Appeal: The Court noted that the CIT (A) who heard the appeal was under transfer and decided to allow him to stay for six months to dispose of the Income Tax Appeal. Both the Income Tax Authorities and legal representatives of the broker agreed to dispose of the appeal within four months without any unnecessary adjournments. The Court directed the CIT (A) to finalize the Income Tax Appeal within six months to avoid delays that a new incumbent might cause. Direction for Timely Disposal of Appeal: In order to prevent a denovo trial if a new incumbent takes over, the Court instructed the authorities not to replace the current CIT (A) until the final decision is made. The Court emphasized the importance of timely disposal of the pending appeal and directed all pending interlocutory applications to be disposed of in light of the given directions. No costs were awarded in this matter.
|