ITR/68/1997 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No.68 of 1997 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Sd/- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED Sd/- ===================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? NO 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? NO 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? NO ===================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - Applicant(s) Versus SUNDER SHYAM TRUST - Respondent(s) =================================================== Appearance : MR BB NAIK for Applicant(s) : 1, SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for Respondent(s) : 1, =================================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED Date : 11/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA) (1) The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench “A” has referred the following two questions under Section 256(1) of the Income- ITR/68/1997 2/3 JUDGMENT tax Act, 1961 (the Act), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax: 1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to charge the tax at normal rate instead of maximum marginal rate ? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the interest charged u/s. 217 of the Act ? (2) The Assessment Years in question are 1984-85 and 1985-86. (3) Heard Mr.B.B.Naik, learned standing counsel for the applicant-revenue. Though served none appears on behalf of the respondent-assessee. (4) Mr.Naik has very fairly invited attention to the judgment rendered by this Court on 11.02.2004 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sinivali Trust, in I.T.R. No.67 of 1997 and cognate references to point out that in case of similarly situated trusts, wherein identical questions were referred for the opinion of this Court, it has been held that the Tribunal was right in directing the ITR/68/1997 3/3 JUDGMENT Assessing Officer to charge the tax normal rate instead of maximum marginal rate and the Tribunal rightly directed deletion of interest under Section 217 of the Act. (5) In the circumstances, it is not necessary to record the facts and contentions in detail. For the reasons stated in the aforesaid judgment, rendered on 11.02.2004 in I.T.R. No.67 of 1997 and cognate matters, both the questions, referred for the opinion of this Court, are answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. (6) The reference stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- [ D.A. MEHTA, J ] Sd/- [Z.K. SAIYED, J ] *** Bhavesh*