M/s. Liberty Footwear Co. v. Commr. of Income-tax, Karnal
[Citation -2016-LL-0211-74]

Citation 2016-LL-0211-74
Appellant Name M/s. Liberty Footwear Co.
Respondent Name Commr. of Income-tax, Karnal
Court SUPREME COURT
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 11/02/2016
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags netting in interest
Bot Summary: UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following ORDER The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order. The question as framed by the High Court in the appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before it is in the following terms: Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in directing the Assessing Officer to allow netting in interest for computing deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income-Tax Act 2 2. The aforesaid question has been answered by this Court in ACG Associated Capsules Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 67 DTR 205. The learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the question as framed really does not arise and the High Court had committed an error in framing the question in the above terms and in answering the same. In this regard, the learned counsel for the Revenue has taken us through the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and also the decision of this Court in Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai 5 SCC 590. As in the present appeal by the Assessee we are only concerned with the correctness of the opinion of the High Court on the question framed by it, we 3 answer the same in favour of the Assessee following the decision of this Court in ACG Associated Capsules Ltd. However, if the Revenue has any grievance(s) with regard to the question framed and the relevance thereof to the present case, it will be open for the Revenue to take out such remedies as may be available to it in law including the remedy of moving the High Court by way of review.


ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.7 SECTION IIIA SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5223/2008 M/S LIBERTY FOOTWEAR CO. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMR.OF INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S) (WITH OFFICE REPORT) Date : 11/02/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT For Appellant(s) Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Ms. Arna Das, Adv. Mr. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar Gupta, Adv. Ms. Monika Ghai, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Ms. Gargi Khanna, Adv. Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, Adv. UPON hearing counsel Court made following ORDER appeal is disposed of in terms of signed order. [VINOD LAKHINA] [ASHA SONI] COURT MASTER COURT MASTER Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by [SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON FILE] Vinod Lakhina Date: 2016.02.16 10:12:07 IST Reason: 1 IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5223/2008 M/S LIBERTY FOOTWEAR CO. ...APPELLANT VERSUS COMMR.OF INCOME TAX, KARNAL ...RESPONDENT ORDER 1. question as framed by High Court in appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 before it is in following terms: Whether, on facts and circumstances of case, Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in directing Assessing Officer to allow netting in interest for computing deduction under Section 80HHC of Income-Tax Act? 2 2. aforesaid question has been answered by this Court in ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [(2012) 67 DTR (SC) 205]. However, learned counsel for Revenue submits that question as framed really does not arise and High Court had committed error in framing question in above terms and in answering same. In this regard, learned counsel for Revenue has taken us through order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and also decision of this Court in Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai [(2003) 5 SCC 590]. 3. As in present appeal by Assessee we are only concerned with correctness of opinion of High Court on question framed by it, we 3 answer same in favour of Assessee following decision of this Court in ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. (supra). However, if Revenue has any grievance(s) with regard to question framed and relevance thereof to present case, it will be open for Revenue to take out such remedies as may be available to it in law including remedy of moving High Court by way of review. 4. appeal stands disposed of in above terms. ....................,J. (RANJAN GOGOI) ...................,J. (PRAFULLA C. PANT) NEW DELHI FEBRUARY 11, 2016 M/s. Liberty Footwear Co. v. Commr. of Income-tax, Karnal
Report Error