Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Pallav Sheth on 12 July, 2016
Bench: A.K. Sikri, N.V. Ramana
1
CORRECTED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). /2016
(Arising out of Civil Appeal Diary No(s).37250/2014)
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
PALLAV SHETH AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 4207/2015
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Appeal admitted. Finally heard.
In these two appeals filed by the Income Tax Department/Revenue there is a challenge to order dated 14.10.2011 which was passed by the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transaction in Securities) at Mumbai in SP.C.R. No. 13 of 2011. By that order the Special Court had directed, as interim measure, disbursement of amount in sum of Rs.2,88,62,273/- in favour of the respondent/Canbank Financial Services Ltd. It was released in favour of the respondent/Canbank Financial Services Ltd. from the Signature Not Verified attached account of Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd., the subject Digitally signed by ASHWANI KUMAR Date: 2016.08.02 16:56:29 IST Reason: matter of which is seized by the said Special Court. The Revenue was not heard when the aforesaid order was passed. According to the 2 Revenue, it has the priority over the amount. For this reason, the Revenue preferred the review application which has been dismissed vide order dated 18.07.2014 without assigning any reasons or going through the issue raised by the Revenue. The second appeal challenges the order passed in the review application. Without commenting upon the validity or legality of the order passed, we are of the opinion, that the Special Court should have dealt with the review application of the Revenue herein on merits and decided the issue on priority by giving detailed reasons. For this reason alone, the two orders passed by the Special Court are set aside and the matters are remitted back to the Special Court to pass fresh order after hearing the Revenue. We may make it clear that insofar as this Court is concerned, it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of this issue. The appeals are disposed of in the above stated terms.
......................J. [A.K. SIKRI] ......................J. [N.V. RAMANA] NEW DELHI;
JULY 12, 2016.
3
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.12 SECTION XVII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 37250/2014 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant(s) VERSUS PALLAV SHETH AND ORS Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 4207/2015 (With appln.(s) for condonation of delay in filing appeal. and appln.(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and Office Report) Date : 12/07/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Appellant(s) Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv.
Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Sunita Dutt, Adv.
Mr. Shashank Trivedi, Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Tewari,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay Condoned.
Appeal admitted.
The Civil Appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Application(s) pending, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file) 4 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). /2016 (Arising out of Civil Appeal Diary No(s).37250/2014) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PALLAV SHETH AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 4207/2015 O R D E R Delay condoned.
Appeal admitted. Finally heard.
In these two appeals filed by the Income Tax Department/Revenue there is a challenge to order dated 14.10.2011 which was passed by the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transaction in Securities) at Mumbai in SP.C.R. No. 13 of 2011. By that order the Special Court had directed, as interim measure, disbursement of amount in sum of Rs.2,88,62,273/- in favour of the respondent/Canbank Financial Services Ltd. It was released in favour of the respondent/Canbank Financial Services Ltd. from the attached account of Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd., the subject matter of which is seized by the said Special Court. The Revenue was not heard when the aforesaid order was passed. According to the Revenue, it has the priority over the amount. For this reason, the 5 Revenue preferred the review application which has been dismissed vide order dated 18.07.2014 without assigning any reasons or going through the issue raised by the Revenue. The second appeal challenges the order passed in the review application. Without commenting upon the validity or legality of the order passed, we are of the opinion, that the Special Court should have dealt with the review application of the Revenue herein on merits and decided the issue on priority by giving detailed reasons. For this reason alone, the two orders passed by the Special Court Court are set aside and the matters are remitted back to the Special Court to pass fresh order after hearing the Revenue. We may make it clear that insofar as this Court is concerned, it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of this issue. The appeals are disposed of in the above stated terms.
......................J. [A.K. SIKRI] ......................J. [N.V. RAMANA] NEW DELHI;
JULY 12, 2016.
6
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.12 SECTION XVII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 37250/2014 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant(s) VERSUS PALLAV SHETH AND ORS Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 4207/2015 (With appln.(s) for condonation of delay in filing appeal. and appln.(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and Office Report) Date : 12/07/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Appellant(s) Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv.
Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Sunita Dutt, Adv.
Mr. Shashank Trivedi, Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Tewari,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay Condoned.
Appeal admitted.
The Civil Appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Application(s) pending, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(Ashwani Thakur) (Tapan Kr. Chakraborty)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)