9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Difference of opinion between judges on reliance on previous tribunal orders, disagreement on decision by a Co-ordinate Bench, eligibility for benefits under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Income-tax Act.
The judgment dealt with three substantial questions of law. The first issue was whether the appellant/assessee could rely on previous Tribunal orders despite making a concession that the case could be decided independently. The second issue was whether the Tribunal could disagree with a previous decision by a Co-ordinate Bench in light of the concession made by the parties. The third issue was whether the expansion of production capacity would qualify for benefits under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Income-tax Act. Regarding the first two questions, there was a disagreement between the judges. One judge believed that the Tribunal could have heard the appeal independently of previous decisions, while the other judge held that the earlier decision should not have been overlooked. The matter was brought before the court due to this difference of opinion. The court decided that the third question needed to be heard by a Larger Bench of the Tribunal due to conflicting views from different benches. It was deemed appropriate for a three-Member Bench to resolve the controversy surrounding the eligibility for benefits under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Income-tax Act. The judgment referenced a previous case to emphasize that a Co-ordinate Bench must follow the decision of an earlier Bench, and in case of disagreement, the matter should be referred to a Larger Bench. The court concluded by disposing of the appeal accordingly.
|
