Calcutta High Court
Commissioner Of Income-Tax ( C )-Ii vs M.K. Foundation on 4 October, 2010
Author: Sengupta
Bench: Sengupta
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction
Original Side
Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Sengupta
And
The Hon'ble Justice Kanchan Chakraborty
04.10.2010
ITA 147 of 2009
Commissioner of Income-tax ( C )-II
Vs.
M.K. Foundation
The Court :- In terms of our order dated 20th September, 2010 fresh certified copy has
been filed. Let this certified copy be stitched up with the Memorandum of Appeal and the tainted
certified copy filed with the Memorandum of Appeal be taken out and returned to the appellant. A
xerox copy of the fresh certified copy of the order be also tagged with the second copy by the
Officer of this Court.
This appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law relating to block
assessment period lst April, 1990 to 24th August, 2000 and Assessment Year 1990-91 to
2001-02 :-
"(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law to
cancel the order of CIT by holding that the order of the assessment was not erroneous and
prejudicial to the interest of the revenue despite the fact that the assessing officer failed to
include the reserves and surplus of M/s. M.K. Shah Exports Ltd. with that of M/s. Safari
Capitals Pvt. Ltd. for quantification of deemed dividend income ?
(b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law innot
appreciating the order of amalgamation dated 5.7.2001 with retrospective effect from
2
18.5.1998 which has a direct bearing on the calculation of the accumulated profits for the
purpose of computation of deemed dividend income which is required to take into
account the reserves and surplus or both the Companies namely M/s. Safari Capital (P)
Ltd. and M/s. M.K. Shah Exports Ltd.?
(c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law to
rely upon the case of Mukundraj K. Shah Vs. CIT reported in CIT 277 ITR 128(Cal)
inspite of the fact that the deemed dividend was never declared by the assessee unlike in
the instant case of the assessee?"
Mr. Sourav Bagaria, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent upon instructions
waives service of notice of appeal. Let requisite number of paper books be filed within two months from date. All parties shall act on a xerox signed copy of this order on usual undertakings.
(Sengupta, J.) (Kanchan Chakraborty, J.) ANC.