Punjab & Haryana H.C : There is no decision of the Supreme Court directly dealing with the law point involved

Counsel Appeared

Gupta with Sanjeev Bansal, for the Assessee : L.K. Sood, for the Revenue

P. GOYAL, J.:

Leave to file appeal to the Supreme Court is sought against our decision dt. 14th Aug., 1986—CIT vs. Mohinder Lal [reported at (1987) 61 CTR (P&H) 154: (1987) 168 ITR 101 (P&H) : TC49R.1212] on the ground that there is conflict of opinion between several High Courts and that there is no decision of the Supreme Court directly dealing with the law point involved. We, however, find no merit in the contention raised. A perusal of the judgment would show that it wholly proceeds on the rule of law laid down by the Supreme Court in two of its decisions in Jose Da Costa vs. Bascora Sadashiva Sinai Narcornin, AIR 1975 SC 1843 and New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Shanti Misra AIR 1976 SC 237. In these circumstances, it is difficult to subscribe to the view that the case involved a law point which is yet to be settled by the Supreme Court. The prayer for leave is, consequently, declined.

D. S. TEWATIA, J.:

I agree.

M. R. AGNIHOTRI, J.:

I agree.

[Citation : 172 ITR 112]