JUDGMENT IN HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 227 of 2006 With TAX APPEAL NO. 411 of 2006 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see judgment ? 2 To be referred to Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see fair copy of judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves substantial question of law as to interpretation of Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to civil judge ? ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX....Appellant(s) Versus SHREE DIGVIJAY CEMENT CO. LTD.....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR PRANAV G DESAI, ADVOCATE for Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sat May 07 11:00:42 IST 2016 O/TAXAP/227/2006 JUDGMENT and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Date : 14/11/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1. By way of these appeals, appellant-Revenue has challenged judgment and order dated 28.06.2005 passed by Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, in ITA No. 157/Rjt/2003 for AY 1992-93. 2. While admitting these appeals on 07.11.2006, this Court has framed following substantial question of law: Whether Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting disallowance made under section 43B in respect of interest on proforma credit under Central Excise Rules? 3. facts of present case are that during course of assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer observed depreciation claimed on two units called for disallowance on basis that production were suspended in these units. Against said order of assessment, assessee has preferred appeal before CIT(A) which was allowed, against which, Revenue has preferred appeal before ITAT which came to be dismissed and order of CIT(A) was upheld. Against said order of ITAT, Revenue has preferred present Tax Appeal. Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sat May 07 11:00:42 IST 2016 O/TAXAP/227/2006 JUDGMENT 4. Heard learned advocates appearing for parties and considered submissions. identical issue also came up for consideration before this Court in Tax Appeal No. 1093/2005, where this Court has observed as under: 3. In circumstances, it is not necessary to set out facts and respective contentions in detail. Today, by judgment of even date, reference on this issue has been answered by this Court against revenue and in favour of assessee. Hence, for self-same reasons, question in present tax appeal stands answered accordingly in favour of assessee and appeal stands disposed of with no order as to costs. 5. In that view of matter, no elaborate reasons are required and we answer question in favour of assessee and against Revenue. present Tax Appeals are dismissed accordingly. (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (K.J.THAKER, J) divya Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sat May 07 11:00:42 IST 2016 Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd