THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-8 versus M/S YES BANK LTD.

Citation: [2019] 5 S.C.R. 6 · Decided: 15-03-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
6
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 5 S.C.R.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-8
v.
M/S YES BANK LTD.
(Civil Appeal No. 3148 of 2019)
MARCH 15, 2019
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND
  DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ.]
Income Tax Act, 1961 – ss.35-D, 260-A and 263 – Issue was
as to whether the respondent-Bank (assessee) is an industrial
undertaking so as to entitle them to claim deduction u/s.35-D of the
1961 Act – After the Assessing Officer passed order, adverse order
was passed by the Commissioner – Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
(ITAT) allowed the appeal filed by the respondent – Appeal by the
appellant-Revenue in the High Court u/s.260-A of the 1961 Act –
Dismissed – On appeal, held: High Court did not frame any
substantial question of law as is required to be framed u/s.260-A of
the 1961 Act – High Court dismissed the appeal without deciding
any issue arising in the case saying that it is not necessary – Main
issue involved in this appeal, as rightly taken note of by the High
Court, was with regard to the applicability of s.35-D of the 1961
Act to the respondent, it was however,  not decided – Impugned
order set aside – Issue with regard to applicability of s.35-D of the
1961 Act to the respondent is already pending consideration before
the High Court at the instance of the respondent in another appeal
– Accordingly, appeal remanded to the High Court for its decision
on merits in accordance with law along with another appeal, if
pending – No opinion expressed on the merits of the case.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The High Court did not frame any substantial
question of law as is required to be framed under Section 260-A
of the Income Tax Act, 1961 though heard the appeal bipartite.
In other words, the High Court did not dismiss the appeal in
limine on the ground that the appeal does not involve any
      [2019] 5 S.C.R. 6
   6
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
7
substantial question of law. The High Court dismissed the appeal
without deciding any issue arising in the case saying that it is not
necessary.  The main issue involved in this appeal, as rightly
taken note of by the High Court in para 6, was with regard to the
applicability of Section 35-D of the 1961 Act to the
respondent-assessee (Bank). It was, however,  not decided.
[Paras 12, 13] [9-C-E]
1.2 The High Court should have framed the substantial
question of law on the applicability of Section 35-D of the 1961
Act in addition to other questions and then should have answered
them in accordance with law rather than to leave the question(s)
undecided. [Para 14] [9-E-F]
1.3 The impugned order is set aside. It was brought to
Court’s notice that the issue with regard to applicability of Section
35-D of the 1961 Act to the respondent-Bank is already pending
consideration before the High Court at the instance of the
respondent in one appeal. The appeal is accordingly remanded
to the High Court for its decision on merits in accordance with
law along with another appeal, if pending, after framing proper
substantial question(s) of law arising in the case. No opinion is
expressed on the merits of the case having formed an opinion to
remand the appeal to the High Court for its disposal on the merits
afresh. The High Court will accordingly decide the appeal
uninfluenced by any observations made in the impugned order
and this order.  [Paras 15, 17, 18] [9-F-H; 10-A-C]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3148
of 2019
From  the  Judgment  and  Order  dated  01.08.2017  of   the  High
Court of  Judicature at Bombay in  ITA No. 599 of 2015.
Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG, S. S. Roy, Ms. Seema Bengani, Anas
Zaidi, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Advs. for the Appellant.
Kunal Cheema, Ajit Wagh, Advs. for the Respondent.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-8 v.
M/S YES BANK LTD.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
8
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 5 S.C.R.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated
01.08.2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in ITA
No.599/2015 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the
appellant herein.
3. This appeal involves a short point as would be clear from the
facts stated infra.
4. The appellant is the Union of India (Income Tax Department)
and the respondent-Bank is the assessee.
5. In the course of assessment proceedings of the respondent-
assessee(Bank) for the Assessment Year 2007-2008, the question arose
as to whether the respondent-assessee(Ba

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.