9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set out three questions. It is not in dispute that the High Court did not frame any question as required u/s 260A (3) As relying on M/s A.A. Estate Pvt. Ltd. . [ 2019 (4) TMI 957 - SUPREME COURT] these appeals have to be allowed and the case needs to be remanded to the High Court for hearing afresh on merits. Appeals allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The appeals are remanded to the High Court for hearing afresh only after framing appropriate substantial question(s) of law as required u/s 260A( 3). - CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 4515-4524 OF 2019 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) Nos.14053-14062 of 2017) - - - Dated:- 1-5-2019 - ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE And DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ. JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de the appeals afresh on merits in accordance with law. 8. The need to remand these appeals is called for because from the perusal of the order, we find that in Para 4, the High Court observed, Assessee has raised the following questions of law in its appeals and then set out four questions. Likewise, in Para 5, the High Court observed, Revenue has raised the following questions of law in its appeals and then set out three questions. 9. It is not in dispute that the High Court did not frame any question as required under Section 260A (3) of the Act. 10. This Court recently examined this question in Civil Appeal No.3968 of 2019 arising out of S.L.P.(c) No.29524 of 2017 (PR. Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wever, not done and instead the High Court without admitting the appeal and framing any question of law issued notice of appeal to the respondent assessee, heard both the parties on the questions urged by the appellant and dismissed it. In our view, the respondent had a right to argue at the time of hearing of the appeal that the questions framed were not involved in the appeal and this the respondent could urge by taking recourse to subsection (5) of Section 260A of the Act. But this stage in this case did not arise because as mentioned above, the High Court neither admitted the appeal nor framed any question as required under subsection (3) of Section 260A of the Act. The expression such question referred to in subsection (5) of Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
