9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (2) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh High Court in C. R. No. 4 of 1979, in which the High Court relied upon an earlier judgment of its own in C. R. No. 11 of 1981, dated April 13, 1983 (see [1985] 154 ITR 893), and answered the reference in the affirmative in favour of the assessee. When these petitions by special leave were filed, it was stated expressly in paragraph 7 that a special leave petition was already pending before this court against the order of the High Court in C. R. No. 11 of 1981 (see [1985] 154 ITR 893), dated April 13, 1983, which was the assessee's own case. On that basis when this court granted leave in these cases, it directed learned counsel to furnish the number of the other special leave petition within eight weeks from that date, i.e., May 10, 1991, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the principle laid down in Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC), held that the assessee was not liable to pay tax on such amounts. The Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of the High Court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of sales tax collections and refunds constituted business receipts liable to be included in the assessments of the assessee for the assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75 ?" The High Court answered the reference in favour of the assessee by following its own judgment in the case of the assessee in C. R. No. 11 of 1981, dated April 13, 1983 (see [1985] 154 ITR 893 (AP)). Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its income collected by way of sales tax. But, in the grounds of appeal there is no reference to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The only grounds raised are that the decision rendered in Chowringhee Sales Bureau P. Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542(SC), would apply and the High Court is wrong in following its own earlier decision in C. R. No. 11 of 1981. As no other ground has been raised, we are not inclined to permit the appellant to raise such grounds which require further investigation of law and facts. It is also contended that when sales tax was collected, the assessee claimed benefit of revenue expenditure thereof and, therefore, when the assessee collected the refund it ought to show the same as its in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
