Gujarat High Court High Court

Commissioner vs Unknown on 16 November, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Commissioner vs Unknown on 16 November, 2011
Author: Akil Kureshi, Gokani,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/1965/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 1965 of 2010
 

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

 

COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX-I - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

GUJARAT
STATE FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
MR BHATT, SR. ADV WITH 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
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 16/11/2011 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

Revenue
is in appeal against the judgment dated 8th August 2008,
raising following substantial question for our consideration:

“Whether,
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was
right in allowing the deduction claimed being interest paid u/s. 36
[1](iii) made on account of (i) the manufacturing of Caprolactum with
advanced technology, (ii) co-generation [Phase-III] Project and (iii)
Ammonia Expansion project, though the interest paid was capitalized
by the assessee in its books of account ?”

It
appears that the assessee had claimed deduction of interest on
borrowed funds though as per the accounts such interest was
capitalized. The Tribunal, however, accepted the assessee’s claim.
Hence this appeal.

Merely
because the assessee treated the interest payment for the accounts
purpose differently would not govern its treatment for the purpose
of income tax. Additionally, we also find that the issue of
deduction of interest under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax
was considered by this Court in the case of DCIT v Core Health Care
Ltd., 298 ITR 194 and held the question in favour of the assessee.
That being the position, this Tax Appeal is dismissed.

(Akil
Kureshi J.)

(Ms.Sonia
Gokani, J.)

(vjn)

   

Top