The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Vi v. M/S.lime Chemicals Ltd
High Court
19 Mar 2010 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Vi v. M/S.lime Chemicals Ltd
Date of order
19 Mar 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Vi v. M/S.lime Chemicals Ltd, the High Court (2010) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
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 BOMBAYO. O. C. J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1963 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax-VI.
...Appellant.
Vs.
M/s.Lime Chemicals Ltd.
...Respondent.
....
Mr. Vimal Gupta with Mr.Suresh Kumar and Ms.Padma Divakar for the Appellant.None for the Respondent.
.....
CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
March 19, 2010.
P.C. :
The appeal by the Revenue was admitted by an order
dated 1[st ] October 2009, on the following question of law:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that 90% of net interest only has to be reduced as per clause (baa) of Explanation below section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, for the purpose of computing the deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?”
The assessee has been served. Though the Advocate has
entered appearance on behalf of the assessee, the Advocate is absent when the appeal has been called out.
The question raised in the appeal is covered in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee by the judgment of this Court delivered today in CIT vs. Asian Star Co. Ltd. (Income Tax Appeal No.200 of 2009). For the reasons indicated in the judgment, the question raised in the present case would have to be answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Ordered accordingly. The appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.)
( J.P.Devadhar, 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.