HOUSING URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED vs. ACIT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 53. ITA 818/2010 . HOUSING URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jayant K. Mehta, Adv. versus . ACIT ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Satyakam, Adv. for Mr.Kamal Sawhney, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN . O R D E R 07.07.2010 CM 11620/2010 (exemption) . Allowed subject to all just exceptions. . CM 11621/2010 (delay in filing), CM 11622/2010 (delay in refiling) . These are applications for condonation of delay in filing and re-filing the appeal. We have heard Mr.Ramji Srinivasan, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Mehta learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Satyakam, learned counsel for the respondent. Regard being had to the averments made in the applications, delay in filing and re-filing the appeal stands condoned. The applications are accordingly disposed of. ITA 818/2010 As we have condoned the delay, we are inclined to take up the appeal for admission. The present appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax ITA 818/2010 Page 1 of 2 Act, 1961 is admitted on following substantial questions of law: i. Whether the authorities below misdirected themselves in disallowing the amount of Rs.4,48,069/- on account of reversal of unclaimed interest on debentures? ii. Whether the provisions of Section 41(4A) as amended by the Finance Bill 1997 can be said to have retrospective effect? iii. Whether the provisions of Section 41(4A) as amended by the Finance Bill 1997 can be made applicable to a Special Reserve ?created? in previous years i.e. 1996-97? . As Mr. Satyakam has entered appearance, no further notice need be issued. At this juncture, it is apt to note as the issue regarding maintainability of the appeal has been raised by learned counsel for the . . respondent, the same is kept open to be delved into at the time of final hearing. . . CHIEF JUSTICE . . . MANMOHAN, J JULY 07, 2010 pk . . . ITA 818/2010 Page 2 of 2