9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (3) TMI 58X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the following two questions for the opinion of this court: "(1) Whether, in view of the Explanation added to section 271 (1) (c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Anwar Ali [1970] 76 ITR 696, still hold the field? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. This case is binding upon us in so far as it interprets the provisions of section 28(1)(c) of the 1922 Act. Since Anwar Ali's case [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC) does not deal with the Explanation to section 271(1)(c), it cannot be treated as binding law in a case arising under the 1961 Act. So far as the position obtaining by virtue of the said Explanation is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y proprio vigore. In view of the fact that the Tribunal has not expressly held that Anwar Ali's case [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC) holds the field even after the introduction of the Explanation, we think it unnecessary to answer question No. 1. So far as question No. 2 is concerned, while it is true that the approach of the Tribunal is coloured by the ratio of Anwar Ali's case [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC), w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
