Gujarat High Court High Court

The vs Unknown on 11 November, 2011

Gujarat High Court
The vs Unknown on 11 November, 2011
Author: K.A.Puj, Honourable Bankim.N.Mehta,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/44820/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No.448 of 2008
 

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


 

THE
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I - Appellant
 

Versus
 

LALBHAI
EXPORTS LTD. - Opponent
 

==========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
MANISH R BHATT with MRS MAUNA M BHATT for Appellant. 
None for
Opponent. 
==========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR. JUSTICE K. A. PUJ
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR. JUSTICE BANKIM N. MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 26/08/2008 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. A. PUJ)

The
Revenue has filed this Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 1996-97 proposing to formulate the
following substantial questions of law:

[A] Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the
disallowance of Rs.7,06,6660/- which was made by the Assessing
Officer considering the same to be a capital payment under voluntary
retirement scheme on closure of cotton textile business?

[B] Whether
the Appellate Tribunal has correctly appreciated the facts on record
in accepting the assessee’s claim that the business had not closed
down?

Heard
Mr.Manish R. Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the
Revenue.

In
this case after detailed discussion, the CIT (A) has confirmed the
order of the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal has not discussed this
issue at all nor any fact is distinctly pointed out in the order. The
CIT (A) has distinguished the fact of the present assessment year
with that of the earlier assessment year and come to the conclusion
that payment made to the employees in Voluntary Retirement Scheme is
in the nature of capital expenditure. The Tribunal has not discussed
this issue and passed the order on the basis of the order for earlier
assessment year. Since the facts are being distinguished so far as
the present year, the order of the Tribunal gives rise to the
substantial questions of law which are required to be formulated.

Hence,
this Tax Appeal is admitted in terms of the above referred to
questions. Notice to other side. Additional Paper-Book, if any, be
filed within three months from today.

[K.

A. Puj, J.]

[Bankim
N. Mehta, J.]

Rajendra

   

Top