| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 2566 2002 SLD 2566 (2002) 256 ITR 795 |
Supreme Court of India
S.P. BHARUCHA, Y.K., SABHARWAL AND BRIJESH KUMAR, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
S.P. BHARUCHA, Y.K., SABHARWAL AND BRIJESH KUMAR, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Commissioner of IncomE tax
v.
Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd.
Law:
Section:
CASE REVIEW Decision of Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 796 affirmed. Note: The case was decided in favour of the assessee. ORDER We have read with order of the High Court and heard learned counsel for the appellant. We are satisfied that upon the facts, no interference with the order of the High Court is called for. The civil appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs. Annexure: Judgment of High Court of Gujarat in CIT v. Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 796. Section 143, read with section 256, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Assessments - Additions to income - Assessment year 1986-87 - Assessee was a company in joint sector - It filed return showing loss - A company 'G' had made an investment in shares of assessee - Assessing Officer having found that 'G' was bogus company, made addition of amount as alleged to be invested by 'G' holding same to be secret income of assessee - Commissioner (Appeals) found that certain big business houses and industrialists were using Sikkim as base for rerouting their unaccounted money; that a search revealed that 'S' was playing important role in laundering of such black-money; that few Sikkim registered companies which were controlled by 'S' had shown huge investment in joint sector companies one of such companies being assessee; and that 25 per cent shares in assessee-company were held by 'G' which was controlled by 'S' - On this premises, Commissioner (Appeals) found that these was no justification for adding aforesaid amount in income of assessee, and, accordingly, it deleted addition - Tribunal upheld order of Commissioner (Appeals) and also rejected application under section 256(1) - Whether, on facts, Tribunal's order was erroneous - Held, no FACTS The assessee was a company in the joint sector. It filed its return for assessment year 1986-87 showing loss. A company 'G' had made an investment in the assessee's shares. The Assessing Officer found that 'G' was a bogus company and same could not be held to be a genuine investment company and, therefore made addition of amount as alleged to be invested by 'G' holding the same as secret fund of the company's funds. On…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492