COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. B.K. DIST. CO. OP. MILK PRODU.UNION LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITR/212/1986HC GujaratGJHC24010836198603 July 2001Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, at the instance of the revenue, referred a question regarding the assessee's entitlement to a 10% weighted deduction under Section 35C of the Income-tax Act. The revenue sought to challenge the Tribunal's conclusion. However, during the hearing, both the learned advocates for the revenue and the assessee submitted that this specific question had already been answered by the High Court in a previous case, I.T.R. No. 32/87. Applying the law laid down in that precedent, the High Court answered the referred question in the negative, meaning in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Consequently, the assessee is entitled to 100% weighted deduction under Section 35C of the Act. The reference stands disposed of accordingly.

What were the facts?

This case involves an Income Tax Reference filed by the revenue at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The reference was made under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C'. The assessee is B.K. Dist. Co. Op. Milk Produ.Union Ltd. The dispute concerns the eligibility of the assessee for a weighted deduction under Section 35C of the Income-tax Act. The specific issue revolves around the percentage of expenses that the assessee is entitled to claim as a weighted deduction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal is right in law in concluding that the assessee is entitled to 10% of the expenses as a weighted deduction under Section 35C of the Income-tax Act, 1961? The revenue contends that the Tribunal's conclusion regarding the 10% weighted deduction is legally incorrect. The assessee, through its learned advocate, argues that it is entitled to the weighted deduction. The judgment states that the question referred to the court has already been answered by this Court in I.T.R. No. 32/87. The specific arguments of each side beyond this reference are not detailed in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 35C,Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 212 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 @ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus B.K. DIST. CO. OP. MILK PRODU.UNION LTD. -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR AKIL QURESHI for MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner No. 1 MR JP SHAH for the RESPONDENT 1

CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE and MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA

Date of decision: 03/07/2001

ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE)

At the instance of the revenue, the following

question has been referred to this court under the provisions of sec. 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' :

"Whether the Tribunal is right in law in coming to the conclusion that the assessee is entitled to 10% of the expenses as a weighted deduction u/s 35C of the I.T. Act?"

2.

Learned advocate Shri Akil Qureshi has appeared for the revenue whereas learned advocate Shri J.P. Shah has appeared for the respondent-assessee.

3.

At the time of hearing of this reference, it has been submitted by the learned advocates that the question which has been referred to this court, has already been answered by this Court in I.T.R. No. 32/87. 4. Looking to the law laid down in the said judgment, we answer the question referred to us in the negative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Thus, looking to the legal provisions, the assessee shall be entitled to 100% weighted deduction under sec. 35C of the Act.

The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.

(A.R. Dave, J.)

(hn) (D.A. Mehta, J.)

More judgments on Section 256(1)

All 755 judgments and leading authorities on Section 256(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →