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: KHEMCHAND MOTILAL JAIN
Court Name: Supreme Court of India Judge(s): V. N. Khare, S. P. Bharucha Title: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs KHEMCHAND MOTILAL JAIN Case No.: Civil Appeal No, 2693 arising out of S.L.P. (C.) No,94 of 1998 Date of Judgment:1998-05-12 Reported As: 1999 PTD 3153 Result: Appeal allowed
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT ' Leave granted. ' The High Court declined to ask the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer to it for adjudication the following question: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sums of Rs,22,91,728 and Rs,22,66,746 paid by the company to the co-owners of the trade mark and partners of the erstwhile firm in lieu of trade mark and goodwill which is being used by the company for its business was a revenue expenditure?" ' It did so because it found that the consistent view of the High Court had been followed by the Tribunal. ' We think that a question of law does arise and that the High Court should have called for a reference. We make it clear that we express no opinion on the answer to be given. ' The appeal is allowed. The order under challenge is set aside. The Tribunal shall refer to the High Court the question afore stated for its decision. ' No order as to costs.