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

1980 Supreme(Cal) 161

SUDHINDRA MOHAN GUHA, SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE
UNION CARBIDE INDIA LTD. – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Debi Pal, MANISHA SEAL, P.K.PAL, SUHAS SEN

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) IN this reference, under Sub-section (1) of Section 256 of the I. T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1967-68, the following questions have been referred to this court for answer ;"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the increase in liability of Rs. 1,75,99,854 due to devaluation was not deductible in computing the assessee's business income ? 2. If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the alternative claim of the assessee-company for development rebate under section 33 of the 'income-tax Act, 1961, on Rs. 1,09,24,832 was not admissible under the provisions of the Act ?"

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate these questions, it is necessary to state certain facts. The assessee is a limited company and, as mentioned hereinbefore, the reference relates to the assessment year 1967-68. The assessee-company under an agreement dated August 16, 1963, had taken a loan from the Export Import Bank of Washington for making payment in the United States of America of





























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