Garden Silk Mills Ltd v. Deputy Commi. Of Income Tax
High Court
24 Oct 2002 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Garden Silk Mills Ltd v. Deputy Commi. Of Income Tax
Date of order
24 Oct 2002
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Garden Silk Mills Ltd v. Deputy Commi. Of Income Tax, the High Court (2002) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- 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
TAX APPEAL No 156 of 1999
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
============================================================
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 concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals?
-------------------------------------------------------------- GARDEN SILK MILLS LTD.
Versus DEPUTY COMMI. OF INCOME TAX.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
1. TAX APPEAL No. 156 of 1999
MR JP SHAH for Petitioner No. 1
MR BB NAIK for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE
and
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
Date of decision: 24/10/2002
(Per : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE)
1�In this appeal, after hearing the learned
Advocates, as suggested by the learned Advocate for the appellant, the following substantial question of law had been framed by this Court at the time of admission.
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances
of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in
holding that the appellant was not entitled to Investment Allowance in respect of the additional cost which it suffered in rupee terms because of
Investment Allowance in respect of the additional cost which it suffered in rupee terms because of the fluctuations in the Rates of Foreign
Exchange?"
2�We have heard Mr.J.P.Shah for the appellant and
learned Standing Counsel Mr.M.R.Shah for the respondent.
The learned Advocates have submitted before this Court that in ITR No.178/85, the Full Bench of this High Court has already rendered its opinion on the question of law
that in ITR No.178/85, the Full Bench of this High Court has already rendered its opinion on the question of law involved in this appeal.
3�In light of this undisputed legal position it is
held that the assessee is entitled to investment allowance in respect of additional cost suffered by it due to exchange rate fluctuation. The orders of the Tribunal and the lower authorities are quashed and set aside in relation to the aforesaid question. The Assessing Officer shall pass appropriate order for giving
effect to this judgment.
4�The appeal is allowed accordingly with no order
as to costs.
���(A.R.Dave, J)�(D.A.Mehta, J)
m.m.bhatt
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.