Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 1966 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1966 (10) TMI 37 - SC - Indian LawsWhether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that the assessee-company was one in which the public are substantially interested within the meaning of section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act? Held that:- The report had evidentiary value and could be taken into account. Undoubtedly the Report had to be brought to the notice of the company, and the company had to be given an opportunity to make its representation against the report and to tender evidence against the truth of the recitals contained therein. It is not suggested that this opportunity was not given. It was for the Tribunal to determine having regard to ordinary human experience whether it may be safely taken that the members of the Kedia family must have acted together as a controlling block. That enquiry has not been made, and the case has been decided on the application of a test which is erroneous. We are, therefore, unable on the statement of case to answer the question referred. We, accordingly, set aside the order passed by the High Court and direct that the Tribunal do submit a supplementary statement of the case under section 66(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, because in our view the statement of the case already referred to is not sufficient to enable determination of the case raised thereby. The Tribunal may make such additions or alterations in the statement of the case in the light of the observations made in the course of this judgment. The Tribunal will submit the supplementary statement of the case to the High Court. The High Court will then proceed to determine the question according to law. The costs of this hearing will be costs in the proceedings before the High Court. Appeal allowed.
|