GUJARAT STATE PETROCHEMICALS CORPN v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA ============================================================
#1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements?
#2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO
#3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement?
#4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
#5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- GUJARAT STATE PETROCHEMICALS CORPN. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
#1. INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 94 of 1987 MR JP SHAH for Petitioner No. 1 MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Date of decision: 14/08/2001 ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per : MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)
1.(cid:9)The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench `A' has referred the following question under Section 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the opinion of this Court. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest of Rs.66,042/- earned by the assessee during pre-production stage is not a receipt on capital account and is taxable as income under other source?"
2.(cid:9)We have heard Shri M.J. Shah for Shri J.P. Shah learned advocate for the applicant and Shri Akil Qureshi learned advocate for the respondent.
3.(cid:9)It is not necessary to set out the facts in detail as it is common ground between both the sides that the controversy is concluded by decision of Supreme Court in case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax 227 I.T.R. 172.
4.(cid:9)In light of the ratio of the aforesaid decision we answer the question in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. (cid:9)The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
14.8.2001.(cid:9) (cid:9)(A.R. Dave, J.) (cid:9) (cid:9)(D.A. Mehta, J.) /phalguni/ (cid:9) (cid:9) (cid:9) (cid:9) (cid:9)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 256(1).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 14 Aug 2001. The bench was A R DAVE, D A MEHTA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.