Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS Respondent: DHARMODAYAM CO. (and another appeal)
Court Name: Supreme Court of India Judge(s): S. P. Bharucha, Mrs. Ruma Pal, Doraiswamy Raju Title:COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs DHARMODAYAM CO. (and another
appeal) Case No.: Civil Appeals Nos.6083 with 6298 of 1997 Date of Judgment:2000-11-21 Reported As: 2001 PTD 2527 Result: Appeals allowed Judgment ORDER The assessm ent years here involved are 1984-85 and 1985-86. Until the introduction of section 1- 1(4A) into the Income Tax Act, 1961, on April 1, 1984, the case of the assessee was governed by the decision of this Court in its own case (CIT v. Dharmodayam Co. (1977) 109 ITR 527). Section 11(4A) has introduced conditions in the application of subsections (1), (2), (3) and (3A) of section 11. It does not appear that the Tribunal has applied its mind to these conditions and given findings of fact as to whether or not they are satisfied. Nor has the High Court given due consideration to this aspect. To be able to decide whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of the exemption under section 11, it is necessary for the Tribunal to determine whether it satisfies the requirements of section 11(4A). Accordingly, the orders of the High Court under challenge and the orders of the Tribunal from which the reference was made are set aside and the matters (I.T.A. No.681/Coch. Of 1987 and I.T.A. No. 264/Coch. Of 1989) are restored to the file of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin, to be considered afresh in the light of what has been stated above. The appeals are allowed accordingly. No order as to costs. .
---
## Page 2
revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.