Garden Silk Mills Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax
High Court
27 Dec 2000 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Garden Silk Mills Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax
Date of order
27 Dec 2000
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Garden Silk Mills Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, the High Court (2000) decided the matter.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- GARDEN SILK MILLS LTD.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 87 of 1997
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
============================================================
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
--------------------------------------------------------------
GARDEN SILK MILLS LTD.
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
MR MANISH J SHAH for Petitioner
MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : CHIEF JUSTICE MR DM DHARMADHIKARI
and
MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
Date of decision: 27/12/2000
ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH)
�In this appeal, the following question is
referred to us :-
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the expenditure of Rs.1,37,97,274/in
respect of the issue of right shares is capital
expenditure ?"
�At the hearing of the reference, the learned counsel for the parties state that the above referred question is already concluded by the decision of this Court in Siddhi Cement Ltd. vs. CIT, 138 ITR 45. �In view of the above, we answer the question in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.
�The reference is accordingly disposed of. There
shall be no order as to costs.
����(D.M. Dharmadhikari, CJ)
����(M.S. Shah, J.)
sundar/-
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.