I.T.O. vs. LAKHANPAL NATIONAL LTD.

TAXAP/177/2000HC GujaratGJHC24022697200018 June 2012Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The appellant-revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging an order dated October 26, 1999, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT had dismissed the revenue's appeal for Assessment Year 1987-88. The High Court admitted the appeal and formulated a substantial question of law concerning the assessee's entitlement to a deduction under Section 80-I of the Act. The assessee is Lakhanpal National Ltd. The dispute pertains to a deduction claimed by the assessee.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, following its own prior decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lakhanpal National Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 365, answered the substantial question of law in the affirmative. This means the Court held that the assessee was entitled to the deduction claimed under Section 80-I of the Act. The reasoning was based on the binding precedent where an identical issue concerning the assessee's own case for Assessment Years 1982-83 and 1983-84 had been decided in favour of the assessee. The appeal filed by the revenue was accordingly dismissed. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to the deduction as claimed by it under Section 80-I of the Act? Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through its counsel, drew the Court's attention to a previous decision of the same High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lakhanpal National Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 365. This decision dealt with an identical question and answered it in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee. Revenue's Contention: The learned standing counsel for the appellant-revenue was not in a position to dispute the position of law established in the cited precedent. Therefore, no detailed arguments were presented by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 80-I

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

TAXAP/177/2000 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 177 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA 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 ? ========================================================= I.T.O. - Appellant(s) Versus LAKHANPAL NATIONAL LTD. - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR KM PARIKH for Appellant(s) : 1, MR JP SHAH for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI Date : 18/06/2012 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)

TAXAP/177/2000 2/3 JUDGMENT 1) By this appeal under section

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 80-I

All 128 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80-I →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →