| Case ID |
29f730e2-a25b-4a61-ba0e-6821e360feda |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 304 TO 307 OF 1976 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 21, 1976 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
In view of the decision of this court in the case of Income-tax Officer, Shillong v. N. Takin Roy Rymbal [1976] 103 ITR 82(SC), these appeals are allowed and the writ petitions filed by the respondent are dismissed. The parties shall bear their own costs throughout. The court has held that clause (a) of section 10(26) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not discriminatory and does not offend article 14 of the Constitution. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the interpretation of clause (a) of section 10(26) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and its implications on the rights guaranteed under article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark decision, upheld the validity of the provision, stating that it is not discriminatory. The ruling emphasized the importance of equitable tax legislation and the need for clarity in tax-related matters. The decision is significant as it underscores the balance between legislative intent and constitutional rights. This case is essential for legal practitioners and lawmakers, as it sets a precedent for future cases involving tax legislation and constitutional scrutiny. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of India
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
H.R. Khanna,
V.R. Krishna Iyer,
N.L. Untwalia
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
Income Tax Officer
|
| Respondents |
Hubert Osrick Unger
|
| Citations |
1976 SLD 499 = (1976) 105 ITR 795
|
| Other Citations |
2016 PTD 1675,
PLD 1997 SC 32
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
10(26)(a)
|