Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
TAXAP/1093/2005 2/ 2 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX
APPEAL No. 1093 of 2005
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 ?
=========================================
COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX - Appellant(s)
Versus
SAURASHTRA
CEMENT & CHEMICAL INDUS. LTD., - Opponent(s)
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR PRANAV G
DESAI for
Appellant(s) : 1,
MR SAURABH SOPARKAR, SR. ADVOCATE with MS BHOOMI
THAKORE and MS. PAURAMI SHETH for MRS SWATI SOPARKAR for Opponent(s)
: 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
and
HONOURABLE
MS. JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
Date
: 16/06/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per :
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)
1. At
the time of admission, following question of law has been framed
under order dated 21st February, 2006:-
“Whether
the ITAT is justified in holding that the disallowance of interest
amounting to Rs.2,27,66,848/- on unpaid sales tax and central sales
tax which remained outstanding at the end of the year was not to be
included in the category of word “tax” and was not to be
disallowed u/s.43B of the Act and that the disallowance of interest
of the said amount requires to be deleted?”
2. It
is an accepted position between the parties that this Tax Appeal
relates to assessment year 1991-92 and the Tribunal has not assigned
any independent reasons but merely followed its own order for
assessment year 1992-93 against which Revenue had come up in
reference on the same issue in Income Tax Reference No.6 of 1998.
3. In
the circumstances, it is not necessary to set out facts and
respective contentions in detail. Today, by a judgment of even date,
the reference on this issue has been answered by this Court against
the revenue and in favour of assessee. Hence, for the self-same
reasons, the question in the present tax appeal stands answered
accordingly in favour of the assessee and the appeal stands disposed
of with no order as to costs.
(
D.A. Mehta, J. ) ( Harsha Devani, J. )
hki
Top