In Case Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Indo, the High Court (2006) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: The question of law which is sought to be raised in this Application is whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of MODVAT credit of excise duty.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O.O.C.J.
Income Tax Application No.33 of 2001
The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Applicant
v/s.
M/s.Foods Inns. Ltd. ..Respondents
Mrs.A.S.Rao for applicant.
----
CORAM : H.L. GOKHALE &
V.R. KINGAONKAR, JJ.
DATED : 1st August 2006
P.C. :
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr.Rao in support of this
Application.
2. The question of law which is sought to be
raised in this Application is whether on the facts
and in the circumstances of the case and in law,
the Tribunal was justified in deleting the
addition made by the Assessing Officer on account
of MODVAT credit of excise duty. This question
has been covered in favour of the assessee in the
case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Indo
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. IndoNippon Chemicals Co.Ltd. reported in ITR 261 page275. This being the position, no need to
Nippon Chemicals Co.Ltd. reported in ITR 261 page
275
entertain the Application and the same is
dismissed.
(H.L. GOKHALE, J.)
(H.L. GOKHALE, J.)
(V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.)
(V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.