Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chemicoat...

Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chemicoat Limited

High Court 28 Aug 2000 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chemicoat Limited
Date of order
28 Aug 2000
Assessment year(s)
1979-80
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chemicoat Limited, the High Court (2000) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 3 of 1985 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI and Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE ============================================================ 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 CHEMICOAT LIMITED -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR AKIL KURESHI FOR MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI and MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE Date of decision: 28/08/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per D.M. DHARMADHIKARI, C.J.) 1.�For the assessment year 1979-80, the following question of law has been referred to us for answer: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the expenses of Rs.3,76,506/- incurred by the assessee in setting to the conclusion that the expenses of Rs.3,76,506/- incurred by the assessee in setting up new unit (the Kandla Project) was allowable as revenue expenditure?" 2.�Learned counsel appearing for the Department brings to our notice two orders in the case of same assessee for other assessment years, i.e., Income Tax References Nos. 260 and 333 both of 1984 decided on 28-12-1999, where similar question has been answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department. The copy of the judgment dated 28-12-1999 passed in Income Tax References Nos. 260 and 333 of 1984 is also placed before us for record. Relying on the decision (supra) on the Income Tax References of the same assessee, the question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. �There shall be no order as to costs. ���(D.M. DHARMADHIKARI, C.J.) ����(A.R. DAVE, J) [sndevu]
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan