Wp/460/2005 Of M/S. R. Kantilal And Co v. Commissioner Of Income Tax And Ors
High Court
05 Apr 2005 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Wp/460/2005 Of M/S. R. Kantilal And Co v. Commissioner Of Income Tax And Ors
Date of order
05 Apr 2005
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/460/2005 Of M/S. R. Kantilal And Co v. Commissioner Of Income Tax And Ors, the High Court (2005) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.460 OF 2005
M/s.R. Kantilal & Co. .. Petitioner.
V/s.
Commissioner of Income-tax
& Others .. Respondents.
Mr.S.M. Lala i/b. Mr.S.M. Sarang for the
petitioner.
Mr.A.S. Rao for the respondents.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 5TH APRIL, 2005.
P.C. :
Heard.
2. Rule.
3. The advocate on record for the revenue waives
service. Heard finally by consent of parties.
5. Having taken into consideration the relevant
aspects, we are of the view that the application made
by the petitioner on September 10, 1997 seeking
extension under Section 80HHC (2)(a) for realisation
of outstanding export proceeds requires
reconsideration. It appears from the available
record that for the exports, the payment has been
received on various dates reflected in Exhibit ‘K’
annexed to the petition. The payments that has been
2
received are, however, delayed. The explanation
given by the assessee for delayed receipt of proceeds
for exports vide aforesaid invoices was, "due to
slackness in the diamond industries and they are also
facing financial crisis". The Commissioner seems to
have overstretched the matter by observing that
assessee ought to have established with evidence that
he was unable to bring the convertible foreign
exchange for the reasons beyond control. The
assessee’s explanation that it was due to Asian
Currency crises in South-East Asian Countries and
devaluation of Hongkong dollar suggests that it was
beyond assessee’s control. The matter requires
consideration by the Commissioner of Income Tax,
Mumbai City XVI, Mumbai.
6. We, accordingly, set aside the order dated
March 15, 2004 impugned in the writ petition and
direct the Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai City
XVI, Mumbai to reconsider the petitioner’s
application dated September 10, 1997 seeking
extension under Section 80HHC (2)(a) in accordance
with law.
7. Rule is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
**********
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.