Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
TAXAP/1797/2005 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX
APPEAL No. 1797 of 2005
=========================================
COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX - Appellant(s)
Versus
SAURASHTRA
CEMENT LTD. - Opponent(s)
=========================================
MR PRANAV G DESAI for Appellant(s) :
1,
None for Opponent(s) :
1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Y.R.MEENA
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.S.DAVE
Date
: 05/10/2006
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
the learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions,
the appeal is admitted in terms of the following substantial
questions of law:
?SA.
Whether the ITAT is justified in holding that the disallowance of
interest expenses of Rs.8,13,17,574.00 on borrowed funds for
modernization/expansion of the business and interest income of
Rs.1,66,38,989.00 earned by temporary deployment of the funds i.e.
net sum of Rs.6,64,78,585.00 concerning the said borrowed funds for
modernization/expansion of business by the Assessing Officer is wrong
and that the assessee is entitled to allowance of the said net amount
of expenses u/s.36(1)(iii) of the IT Act?
B.
Whether ITAT is justified in holding that the interest income of
Rs.1,66,38,989.00 on account of temporary deployment of borrowed fund
is required to be allowed as deduction by way of separate deduction
over and above interest expenditure of Rs.8,13,17,585.00 allowed as
expenditure by the C.I.T.(A)?
C.
Whether the ITAT is justified in holding that the disallowance of
Rs.6,06,013.00 concerning contribution to National Council or Cement
and Building Material made by the Assessing Officer is illegal and
that the same is required to be allowed as expenditure allowable
u/s.37(1) of the Act as incurred for the purpose of business?
D.
Whether the ITAT is justified in holding that the Assessing Officer
is not justified in deletion of the sum of Rs.2,55,33,060.00 being
interest on deferred payment of Sales Tax Liability?
E.
Whether the ITAT is justified in holding that the amount of
Rs.10,32,527.00 being expenditure incurred on polishing and
electrification work of office of the assessee at Bombay not allowed
by the Assessing Officer being in the nature of capital expenditure
is illegal and the assessee is entitled to allowance of the same?
F.
Whether the ITAT is justified in holding that payment made by the
assessee of Rs.6,00,300.00 to Heritage India Club not allowed as
expenditure by the Assessing Officer is illegal and the same is
required to be allowed as business expenditure???s
Issue
notice to the other side. Paper Book be filed within three months.
List the appeal for final hearing after three months.
(Y.R.
MEENA, ACTG. C.J.)
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.)
[sn
devu] ps
Top