SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 608

D.M.DHARMADHIKARI, N.S.HEGDE, S.P.BHARUCHA
Apollo Tyres: Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ernakulam – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kochi: Apollo Tyres LTD. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Santosh Hegde, J.-These appeals arise out of a common judgment delivered by a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in ITR Nos. 70/1994 and 43/1997.

2. Civil Appeal No. 6100/1998 is preferred by the assessee company and Civil Appeal Nos. 2518-19/1999 are preferred by the C.I.T., Ernakulam.

3. Though a number of questions came up for consideration before the High Court, in these appeals, based on the arguments addressed before us, we are mainly concerned with the following three questions :

  (i) Can an Assessing Officer while assessing a company for income tax under Section 115-J of the Income Tax Act question the correctness of the profit and loss account prepared by the assessee company and certified by the statutory auditors of the company as having been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act?

(ii) Whether the dividend income earned by the assessee company from its investment made in the units of Unit Trust of India, can be included in computing the profit of the eligible business under Section 32AB of the Income Tax Act ?

(iii) Whether the busine




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top