M/S Shivom Cotspin Limited v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA No.5 of 2018 Date of decision : 19.03.2018 M/s Shivom Cotspin Limited … Appellant Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax ….Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?[1] For the Appellant :Mr. Vishal Mohan, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate. Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice(Oral) Primarily, three substantial questions of law arise for consideration in the present appeal. (i)As to whether the appellant is entitled to benefits of deduction under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (ii)As to whether the appellant is entitled to deduction under Section Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… 80IC of the Act in respect of the income received as duty drawback and interest accrued thereon. income received as duty drawback and interest accrued thereon. (iii)As to whether the appellant is entitled to deduction of the interest accrued in respect of late payment by the debtors. entitled to deduction of the interest accrued in respect of late payment by the debtors. 2. Insofar as substantial question of law No.1 is concerned, we are of the considered view, which fact is not disputed, that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment rendered in M/s Stovekraft India V. Commissioner of Income Tax, passed by this Court in ITA No.20 of 2015, decided on 28.11.2017 and the entitlement of the assessee for deduction will be decided by the Assessing Officer. 3. Insofar as substantial question of law No.2 is concerned, we are of the considered view that the matter is squarely covered by the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, ITR 2003 (Volume 262) 278, against the assessee. 4. Insofar as substantial question of law No.3 is concerned, the same is no longer res integra and stands decided in favour of the assessee in terms of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Govinda Choudhury and sons, ITR 1993 (Volume 203) 881 as also the decision rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Courtin ITA No.4015 of 2013, titled as Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jai Prakash Hydro Power Ventures Ltd. on 15.5.2017. 5. Substantial questions of law are answered accordingly. Appeal stands disposed of, so also, pending application(s), if any. (Sanjay Karol), Acting Chief Justice March 19, 2018 (KS/Purohit) (Ajay Mohan Goel), Judge.