COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. GOLDEN SAT ISABGOL FACTORY

ITR/54/1986HC GujaratGJHC24010678198603 August 2001Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

This is an Income Tax Reference filed by the revenue at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The assessee is M/s. Golden Sat Isabgol Factory. The reference concerns assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The questions referred to the High Court under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, pertain to the allowability of deductions under Sections 80HH and 80J. The revenue is the applicant, and the assessee is the respondent. The High Court heard the learned advocate for the revenue, but no one appeared for the assessee despite being served.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court answered both questions in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The reasoning provided is that the Court followed the law laid down by itself in I.T.R. No. 282 of 1985, decided on 14/06/2001. The judgment does not elaborate on the specific reasoning from the earlier case but relies on its precedent. Therefore, the principle is that if a prior judgment of the same High Court has decided similar issues regarding the allowability of deductions under Sections 80HH and 80J, that precedent will be followed. The operative direction is that the reference stands disposed of accordingly, with both questions answered in favour of the assessee. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the issues?

The High Court was asked to decide two questions of law at the instance of the revenue: 1. Whether both deductions under Section 80HH and Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are allowable in full to the assessee? 2. Whether, when the relief under Section 80HH had exceeded the relief admissible under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee was entitled to relief under both Section 80HH and Section 80J in full? Contentions: Assessee: No arguments were recorded for the assessee as no one appeared on their behalf. Revenue: The revenue, as the applicant, presented arguments through its learned advocate, Mr. B.B. Nayak. The specific arguments of the revenue are not detailed in the judgment, but the reference itself indicates their challenge to the allowability of both deductions in full.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 256(1),Section 80HH,Section 80J

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 54 of 1986

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE and 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 ----------------

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 256(1)

All 370 judgments and leading authorities on Section 256(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →