Commissioner Of Income Tax & ... vs M/S Jindal Polyester & Steel Ltd.
2014 Latest Caselaw 1172 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 33
 

 
Case :- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 257 of 2000
 

 
Appellant :- Commissioner Of Income Tax & Another
 
Respondent :- M/S Jindal Polyester & Steel Ltd.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- A.N.Mahajan,A.Kumar,B.J.Agarwal,D. Awasthi,G. Krishna,R.K. Upadhyay,S.Chopra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- R.S. Agarwal
 

 
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar,J.

Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.

This is an appeal under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act relating to the assessment of year 1990-91 arising from the order of the Tribunal dated 28.4.2000 raising following questions of law.

1- Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was legally justified in holding that the change in method of charging depreciation from straight line to WDV method is approved under the Company Act and there is no specific prohibition under section 115 J and IT Act whereas the assessee has arbitrarily short computed its tax liability under Section 115 J and depreciation charged to books was considerably swelled by adopting methods not permissible under relevant provisions of I.T. Act ?.

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. ITAT is legally correct in reversing the order of Ld. CIT (A) and the A.O. by holding that intt. under section 234 B and 234 C is not chargeable where the income of the assessee is computed within the deeming provisions of Section 115 J?.

Heard Sri Dhananjai Awasthi, learned Senior Standing Counsel and Sri Rupesh Jain appearing for the respondent along with Sri R. S. Agarwal.

Counsel for both the parties submitted that the question no. 1 is covered by the decision of this Court  in Income Tax Appeal No. 182 of 2000 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut and Another vs. M/S Hindustan Pipe Udyog Ltd. Jandal Nagar Ghaziabad decided on 28.28.2012 and the question no. 2 is covered by the decision of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 46 of 2000 in the case of Modi Zerox Ltd. New Delhi vs. CIT Meerut decided on 16.10.2012. The first question has been decided in favour of the assessee and the question no. 2 has been decided in favour of the revenue. Respectfully, following the decisions of this Court referred  herein above, the questions referred are answered accordingly.

The question no. 1 is decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue and the question no. 2 is decided in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.

The appeal is allowed in part. The order of the Tribunal requires modification. We hold that the assessee is liable for interest under section 324 B and 324 C. The Tribunal is set-aside to this extent.

Order Date :- 24.4.2014

Monika