2004 PLP 2149 (PTD)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX Versus GOGINENI TOBACCO LTD.
| Citation | 2004 PLP 2149 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | 253 I T R 800 |
| Bench Members | B.N. Kirpal and S. Rajendra Babu, JJ |
| Parties | COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX Versus GOGINENI TOBACCO LTD. |
| Primary Law | Income‑tax‑‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 2149 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income‑tax‑‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 2149 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the 253 I T R 800 bench comprising: B.N. Kirpal and S. Rajendra Babu, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 2149 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX Versus GOGINENI TOBACCO LTD.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- R. N. Trivedi, Additional Solicitor General of India (Tara Chand Sharma and S. K. Dwivedi, Advocates with him) for Appellant.
- A. Subba Rao, Advocate for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
(Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order, dated October 16, 1998 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Income‑tax Case No.45 of 1998). ‑‑‑‑Reference‑‑‑Export business‑‑‑Special deduction‑‑‑Whether to be claimed on total income after deduction of unabsorbed losses and unabsorbed depreciation or otherwise‑‑‑Question of law‑‑‑Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.80HHC & 256‑‑‑[CIT v. Gogineni Tobacco Ltd. (1999) 238 ITR 970 reversed]. The question whether the benefit under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be claimed on the total income after deduction of unabsorbed loss and unabsorbed depreciation or otherwise is a question of law. (The Supreme Court accordingly directed the Appellate Tribunal to state a case on this question of law to the High Court). CIT v. Gogineni Tobacco Ltd. (1999) 238 ITR 970 reversed.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑Reference‑‑‑Export business‑‑‑Special deduction‑‑‑Whether to be claimed on total income after deduction of unabsorbed losses and unabsorbed depreciation or otherwise‑‑‑Question of law‑‑‑Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.80HHC & 256‑‑‑[CIT v. Gogineni Tobacco Ltd. (1999) 238 ITR 970 reversed]. The question whether the benefit under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be claimed on the total income after deduction of unabsorbed loss and unabsorbed depreciation or otherwise is a question of law. (The Supreme Court accordingly directed the Appellate Tribunal to state a case on this question of law to the High Court). CIT v. Gogineni Tobacco Ltd. (1999) 238 ITR 970 reversed. R. N. Trivedi, Additional Solicitor General of India (Tara Chand Sharma and S. K. Dwivedi, Advocates with him) for Appellant. A. Subba Rao, Advocate for Respondent. Special leave granted. After hearing counsel for the parties, in our opinion, the High Court was not correct in dismissing the application under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A question of law does arise. We, therefore, allow the appeal and direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following question of law to the High Court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, benefit of section 80HHC can be claimed on the total income after deduction of unabsorbed losses and unabsorbed depreciation or otherwise?" M.B.A./1106/FC Order accordingly.