Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jaiswal Chemicals P. Ltd. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in[2001]248ITR106(SC)
ActsIncome-tax Act, 1961 - Sections 32AB, 80-I and 256(2)
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax;commissioner of Income-tax
RespondentJaiswal Chemicals P. Ltd.;abhijit Iron Processors P. Ltd.
Advocates: K.N. Raval, Additional Solicitor General,; Hemant Sharma and;
Excerpt:
- central excise act, 1944.[c.a. no. 1/1944]. section 11b [as amended by act 40/1991]: [dr. arijit pasayat & s.h. kapadia, jj] refund of duty applicability of concept of unjust enrichment excise duty paid under protest held, determination of crucial question is as to whether the duly element had been passed on to the consumer is necessary. order holding that bar of unjust enrichment was not applicable merely on the ground that original payments of duty were made under protest is not sustainable. .....the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in law in upholding the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) in directing the assessing officer to treat the interest income as eligible profits of the business while computing the deduction under section 32ab of the act whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in law in upholding the order of the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) in directing the assessing officer to include the interest income in the gross total income while computing the relief under section 80-i of the act 2. there will be no order as to costs.c.a. no. 5673 of 1999 at s.l.p. (c) no. 9107 of 1999 :3. special leave granted. after hearing learned counsel for the appellant, in our opinion, a question of law did.....
Judgment:
ORDER

C.A. Nos. 5671-72 of 1999 at S.L.P. (C.) Nos. 8892-93 of 1999 :

1. Leave granted. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, in our opinion, questions of law did arise. We, therefore, allow this appeal and direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following two questions of law to the High Court :

'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in directing the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as eligible profits of the business while computing the deduction under Section 32AB of the Act

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in directing the Assessing Officer to include the interest income in the gross total income while computing the relief under Section 80-I of the Act

2. There will be no order as to costs.

C.A. No. 5673 of 1999 at S.L.P. (C) No. 9107 of 1999 :

3. Special leave granted. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, in our opinion, a question of law did arise. We, therefore, allow this appealand direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following question of law to the High Court :

'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in granting relief to the assessee under Section 32AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the interest component of the income earned out of the monies invested in short term deposits for the assessment year 1990-91?'

4. There will be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //