Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1840 (RAJ)

Singhal Industries v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

2002-11-15

GYAN SUDHA MISRA, Y.R.MEENA

body2002
Judgment 1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant. Considering his submissions, the appeal is admitted in terms of the following questions.: “Whether the CBDT Instruction No. 1942, dt. 11th July, 1997, is an instruction issued under Section 119 of the IT Act, 1961?” “Whether the notice under Section 143(2) issued by the assessing authority is against Instructions of CBDT was illegal and as such the assessment framed thereupon and further orders issued are annulled/void?” 2. Issue notice to the other side. Notices be made returnable within six weeks. Paper book be filed within 3 months. 3. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant on the stay application also. 4. Considering his submissions, no case in made out for staying the operation of the order dt. 28th March, 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. Consequently the stay application is rejected. 5. List the appeal itself for hearing after 3 months.