Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sudarshan

Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sudarshan

High Court 27 Jun 2005 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sudarshan
Date of order
27 Jun 2005
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Sudarshan, the High Court (2005) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Issue: The learned counsel for the Appellant tendered a draft amendment to incorporate questions of law which read as under: i."Whether in the facts and in the circumstances and in the law the tribunal is right in hold that the amount collected by way Excise Duty, Sales Tax Refund cannot be included in the...

Decision: The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5 OF 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5 OF 1999 The Commissioner of Income tax-I Pune ...Appellant. V/s. M/s.Baker Mercer (I)Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondents. Mr.A.S.Rao for the Appellant. Mr.P.D.Damodar i/b M/s.Kanga & Co. for the Respondent. CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 27th June, 2005. CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 27th June, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant and the learned counsel for the Respondents. The learned counsel for the Appellant tendered a draft amendment to incorporate questions of law which read as under: i."Whether in the facts and in the circumstances and in the law the tribunal is right in hold that the amount collected by way Excise Duty, Sales Tax Refund cannot be included in the turnover for the purposes of deduction U/s 80 H H C". : 2 : 2. Amendment allowed. Amendment to be carried out within a week from today. The learned counsel for the Appellant (Revenue) also states that the Tribunal has taken a view that the amount collected by way of Excise Duty, Sales Tax Refund can not be included in the turnover for the purpose of deduction under section 80(H)(H)(C)(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The learned counsel for the Appellant also pointed out that the Division Bench of our High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sudarshan Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. and Others,Bombay, Chemicals Industries Ltd. and Others,Bombay, 245 ITR 769 245 ITR 769 has also taken the view that the 245 ITR 769 Excise Duty and Sales Tax refund can not be included the total turnover for the purpose of computing special deduction under section 80(H)(H)(C)(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the light of the aforesaid judgment of our High Court, we answer above question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. : 3 : 3. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.)
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