THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SURYA ROSHINI LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 148 / 2009HC Delhi25 March 20091 pages
For Petitioner: RASHMI CHOPRA
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that all three substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue were covered by previous decisions of its own Division Benches. Specifically, question (a) was covered by the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd., (2007) 294 ITR 451 (Delhi). Questions (b) and (c) were covered by the Division Bench judgment in ITA 402/2005, CIT vs. Jindal Exports Ltd., dated 06.02.2009. Based on these precedents, the High Court found no error in the ITAT's order. The appeal filed by the Revenue was accordingly dismissed.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns an appeal filed by the Revenue against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal raises three substantial questions of law. The first question pertains to the deletion of excess depreciation claimed by the assessee on account of foreign exchange fluctuation. The second and third questions relate to the applicability of Sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the deletion of interest charged thereunder, in cases of assessment under Section 115JA of the Act. The High Court noted that these questions were covered by previous judgments of its own Division Benches.

What were the issues?

The High Court was asked to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT erred in deleting the excess depreciation claimed by the assessee on account of foreign exchange fluctuation? (Question of law) 2. Whether the learned ITAT erred in law and on merits in holding that the provisions of Section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not applicable in cases of assessment under Section 115JA of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (Question of law) 3. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT erred in deleting the interest charged under Section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act? (Question of law) Contentions: Revenue: Argued that the ITAT erred in deleting the excess depreciation and the interest charged under Sections 234B and 234C, and in holding that these sections are not applicable to assessments under Section 115JA. Assessee: No arguments for the assessee were recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115JA,Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 25.03.2009 Present: Ms Rashmi Chopra and Mr Chandramani Bhardwaj, Advocates for the Appellant. Mr Prakash Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent. . + ITA No.148/2009 . This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue wherein the following substantial questions of law have been proposed:- ?(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT erred in deleting the excess depreciation claimed by the assessee on account of foreign exchange fluctuation? (b) Whether the learned ITAT erred in law and on merits in holding that the provisions of Section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not applicable in cases of assessment under Section 115JA of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (c) Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT erred in deleting the interest charged under Section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act?? . So far as the question of law (a) is concerned, it is covered by a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd., (2007) 294 ITR 451 (Delhi). Similarly, proposed substantial questions of law (b)and (c) are covered by a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in ITA 402/2005 entitled CIT ?vs- Jindal Exports Ltd., dated 06.02.2009 Accordingly, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. . . A.K. SIKRI, J. . . . RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. MARCH 25, 2009/nt . 2

More judgments on Section 115JA

All 209 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115JA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →