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

1986 Supreme(AP) 409

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, Y.V.ANJANEYULU
Commissioner of Income Tax – Appellant
Versus
Godavari Plywoods Ltd. – Respondent


Y. V. ANJANEYULU, J.

( 1 ) IN a batch of cases, references were made to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short ). All the cases involve a common question of law; there are other questions also in a few cases. Before setting out the main question referred for the consideration of this court, it will be expedient to refer to the facts giving rise to this question.

( 2 ) AS part of the measures to ensure balanced regional development, the Government of India had announced certain financial incentives for industries established in selected backward districts/areas. These are in addition to the facilities and incentives offered by the individual State Governments. The incentive scheme for the country as a whole, as announced by the Government of India in the year 1971, is "central OUTRIGHT GRANT OR SUBSIDY SCHEME, 1971". The backward areas under the scheme were clearly specified. In order to become eligible to the Central subsidy, the industrial units should have been set up in the backward areas after the dates specified in the scheme. The industrial units are also eligible for Central subsidy where effecti

































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