Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
TAXAP/561/1999 2/ 2 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX
APPEAL No. 561 of 1999
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
HONOURABLE
MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
P.R.
SHIPBREAKING CORPORATION - Appellant(s)
Versus
ARTI
HANDA & 1 - Opponent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
RK PATEL with MS PAURAMI SHETH
for Appellant
MRS MAUNA
M BHATT for Respondents
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
and
HONOURABLE
MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
Date
: 20/04/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI)
While
admitting the appeal on 28th August 2000, the Court had
formulated the following substantial question of law :
Whether
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee
is not entitled to the deduction under section 80HH and 80I of
the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the assessee’s
business of ship breaking was not an `industrial undertaking’
involving the manufacture or production of articles or things
within the meaning of the said
section?”
Heard the learned
advocate for the parties.
It
is an accepted position between the parties that the controversy
involved in the present case stands concluded by a decision of the
Apex Court in the case of Vijay
Ship Breaking Corporation and others v. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(2009) 314 ITR 309 (SC), whereby the Court has answered the question
in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
In
the light of the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court, the question
stands answered accordingly. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed
with no order as to costs.
[D.A.MEHTA,
J.]
[HARSHA
DEVANI, J.]
parmar*
Top