HC Dismisses Contempt in Matrimonial Case

Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday rejected a contempt plea in a matrimonial case, wherein a husband complained of refusal by his wife to grant divorce. The wife had moved the family court for restitution of conjugal rights. In a contest, she succeeded with a decree for restitution against her husband. On appeal, a division bench recorded that the husband would pay a sum of Rs 30 lakh in three instalments and the marriage would be dissolved. The wife filed a review petition stating that she belonged to a community where a woman and her spouse are to live together till death. Meanwhile, the husband complained of contempt of thedivision bench’s order.

The bench of Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy observed that the wife cannot be forced to have her marriage dissolved under the threat of a contempt petition. The bench also allowed the review petition. Effectively, the husband’s petition against the decree for restitution of conjugal rights will not be heard on merits.

Tax appeal against Hyundai dismissed

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday upheld an order of the Income Tax (I-T) Appellate Tribunal, which set aside an assessment made against Hyundai Motors India Engineering. The bench of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty were hearing a tax appeal filed by the I-T department against Hyundai Motors India.

The automobile company is involved in the business of rendering support services in the computer-aided engineering field. They were assessed for 2015-2016 and subject to scrutiny under the I-T Act. In terms of the procedure prescribed before an assessment is finalised, the statute requires the assessing
authority to first forward a draft assessment order to the assessee, calling for objection, if any. The objections are to be submitted within 30 days from the date of receipt, after which the assessing authority shall pass the final assessment order.

 This requirement under law was disputed in the present appeal. When the draft assessment order under Section 144-C was sent to the respondent, it also was accompanied by a notice of demand and penalty. The tribunal, after considering the contentions put forth by the parties, allowed the appeal, setting aside the order passed by the CIT (Appeals), which was challenged in the High Court.

After a detailed consideration of the relevant provisions of the I-T Act and reported judgments, the bench recorded a finding that the order passed by the assessing authority was a final assessment order, more particularly, when the authority concerned has also ordered and directed for initiation of
penalty proceedings simultaneously along with the draft assessment order. “Hence, this bench has no hesitation in reaching the conclusion that the finding arrived at by the tribunal while allowing the appeal of the respondent/ assessee was proper, legal and justified,” Justice Koshy observed.