Gujarat High Court High Court

Commissioner vs Unknown on 3 October, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Commissioner vs Unknown on 3 October, 2011
Author: Akil Kureshi, Gokani,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/1611/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 1611 of 2010
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX - II - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

JAY
CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MRS
MAUNA M BHATT
for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
None for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

 HONOURABLE
			MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI     3rd October 2011
		
	

 

 ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

Tax
Appeal is admitted for consideration of following substantial
questions of law :-

{A} “Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by the CIT (A) in directing to exclude sales tax and
excise duty from the total turnover for the computation of deduction
u/s. 80HHC even after insertion of Section 145A of the Act ?”

{B} “Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by the CIT (A) in deleting the exclusion of 90% of sales
tax and excise duty refund from the profits while computing the
deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act ?”

{C} “Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts n confirming the
order passed by the CIT (A) deleting the exclusion of interest
received from customers parties for late
payment of dues / outstanding ?”

{D} ”

Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in
confirming the order passed by the CIT (A) deleting the exclusion of
commission and clearing charges in computation of business profit for
the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC ?”

{E} “Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that
the assessee is entitled to deduction for cost of DEPB licence while
computing deduction u/s. 80HHC ?”

{F} “Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by the CIT (A) deleting the addition of Rs. 8,24,122/=
made to closing stock of finished goods on account of excise element
?”

{G} “Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by the CIT (A) deleting the disallowance of Rs.
45,85,729/= made u/s. 40A (2)(b) of the Act ?”

{Akil
Kureshi, J.}

{Ms.

Sonia Gokani, J.}

Prakash*

   

Top