S. 260A(4): High Court has power to hear the appeal on questions not formulated at the stage of admission of the appeal

CIT vs. Mastek Limited (Supreme Court)

 

The department filed an appeal u/s 260A in the High Court in which it raised several questions. The High Court admitted the appeal and framed two substantial questions of law. The Department filed a SLP claiming that by necessary implication, the other questions raised in the memo of appeal before the High Court had been rejected. HELD by the Supreme Court dismissing the SLP:

The Revenue is under some misconception. The proviso following the main provision of Section 260A(4) of the Act states that nothing stated in sub-section (4), i.e., “The appeal shall be heard only on the question so formulated’ shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that the case involves such question”. The High Court’s power to frame substantial question(s) of law at the time of hearing of the appeal other than the questions on appeal has been admitted remains under Section 260A(4). This power is subject, however, to two conditions, (one) the Court must be satisfied that appeal involves such questions, and (two) the Court has to record reasons therefor.