The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-1 v. M/S.grindwell Norton Ltd
High Court
19 Jun 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-1 v. M/S.grindwell Norton Ltd
Date of order
19 Jun 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-1 v. M/S.grindwell Norton Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: 2.The issue involved in this Appeal is as to whether interest received on overdue payment in business is deductible under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act.
Decision: The Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
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 JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.991 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income-tax-1
vs.
M/s.Grindwell Norton Ltd.
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan i/by Suresh Kumar for Appellant
Mr.A.K. Jasani for Respondent
P.C.:
1.Heard learned Counsel for rival parties. All office objections are overruled. Appeal taken up for hearing on admission, by consent of parties. objections are overruled. Appeal taken up for hearing on admission, by consent of parties.
2.The issue involved in this Appeal is as to whether interest received on overdue payment in business is deductible under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. This issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Govinda Choudhury & Sons, 203 ITR 881 and also of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income tax vs. Bhansali Engineering Polymarks Ltd., (2008) 306 ITR 194 (Bombay).interest received on overdue payment in business is deductible under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. This issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Govinda Choudhury & Sons, 203 ITR 881 and also of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income tax vs. Bhansali Engineering Polymarks Ltd., (2008) 306 ITR 194 (Bombay).
3.In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law is involved in the present Appeal. The Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.
[J.P. DEVADHAR, J.]
[V.C. DAGA, J.]
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.