Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Kherani Paper Mills (P) Ltd

O/ITR/13/2005 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO. 13 of 2005 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX....Applicant(s) Versus KHERANI PAPER MILLS (P) LTD.....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR SUDHIR M MEHTA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERIandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Date : 08/12/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench ‘A’ has referred the following question no. 4, at the instance of the applicant-Revenue, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, though the revenue had suggested as many as four questions. Three questions being already covered by decision of Jurisdictional Court, the following question was referred: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and proper interpretation of provisions of section 158BB and Part-II, Part-III of the Form No. 2B for Block Assessment, the ITAT was justified in law in holding that the assessee is eligible to deduction u/s. 80I with reference to “total undisclosed income” of the Block period ? 2.The facts of the present case are that a search and seizure operation was carried out at the business premises of M/s. Kherani Paper Mills Pvt Ltd on 1.12.1995 which concluded on 5.1.96. The company was originally promoted by another group namely Shri Abubhai Kherani and his brothers in the year 1991, which was later on taken over by Shri N. R. Agarwal group. After the O/ITR/13/2005 JUDGMENT take-over, in the AY 1994-95, this company was informally known as Gayatri Paper & Boards Ltd., also. The company is in the business of manufacturing of Duplex Board. It was one of the six companies of M/s. N.R. Agarwal Group which was covered under sec. 182 on the same date. In response to notice under sec. 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee filed Block return in Form2-B on 23[rd] February 1996 declaring undisclosed Income fo Rs. 17,83,454.00. In response to various notices issued under sec. 143(2) of the Act, necessary details were filed asper various order sheet entries. Thereafter, considering the material on record, the assessment order came to be passed. take-over, in the AY 1994-95, this company was informally known as Gayatri Paper & Boards Ltd., also. The company is in the business of manufacturing of Duplex Board. It was one of the six companies of M/s. N.R. Agarwal Group which was covered under sec. 182 on the same date. In response to notice under sec. 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee filed Block return in Form2-B on 23[rd] February 1996 declaring undisclosed Income fo Rs. 17,83,454.00. In response to various notices issued under sec. 143(2) of the Act, necessary details were filed asper various order sheet entries. Thereafter, considering the material on record, the assessment order came to be passed. 3.Heard the learned advocate appearing for the revenue and considered the submissions. The issue involved in the present matter is covered by the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax v. N.R. Paper And Board Ltd., reported in [2009] 313 ITR 359 (Guj.). The facts in this case and the decision relied are similar so it applies in all force to this case. In that view of the matter, the question referred to this Court for opinion is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The present Reference is answered accordingly. (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) mandora (K.J.THAKER, J)