Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.17 seconds)

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Tamil Nadu vs Carborundum Universal Ltd. on 3 August, 1983

4. The principle enunciated in CIT v. Carborandum Universal Ltd. [1985] 156 ITR 1 (MaD) And Sundaram Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1986] 159 ITR 646 (Mad), could come into play only when there is no reason whatever to depart from the view taken already. If the High Court finds in any particular matter that the view taken in an earlier decision requires reconsideration, then the only course open to the High Court is to direct the Tribunal to make a reference. Otherwise, it will lead to a situation where a decision once rendered will be conclusive and binding for ever, unless reversed or overruled by the Supreme Court. It is always open to a Division Bench of this court to refer the matter to a larger Bench when it finds it necessary to differ from an earlier decision of a Division Bench.
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 84 - Full Document

Sundaram Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 29 January, 1986

4. The principle enunciated in CIT v. Carborandum Universal Ltd. [1985] 156 ITR 1 (MaD) And Sundaram Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1986] 159 ITR 646 (Mad), could come into play only when there is no reason whatever to depart from the view taken already. If the High Court finds in any particular matter that the view taken in an earlier decision requires reconsideration, then the only course open to the High Court is to direct the Tribunal to make a reference. Otherwise, it will lead to a situation where a decision once rendered will be conclusive and binding for ever, unless reversed or overruled by the Supreme Court. It is always open to a Division Bench of this court to refer the matter to a larger Bench when it finds it necessary to differ from an earlier decision of a Division Bench.
Madras High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 26 - Full Document
1