COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. PARLE PLASTICS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") is directed against the order dt. 1st Oct., 2001 of the Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji.

(2.) The Respondent No. 1 M/s Parle Plastics Ltd. (for short "the Assessee"), filed a return of income on 29th Nov., 1997 declaring nil total income for the asst. yr. 1997-98. The case was taken up for scrutiny by issuing a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. The Dy. CIT (Inv.), Panaji, Goa, who was the AO held that the total income of the Assessee assessable to tax was Rs. 2,35,09,482. Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the Assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), Belgaum. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the AO for recomputation of interest in the light of the decision. Aggrieved by partial rejection of the appeal, the Assessee filed a further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji (for short "the Tribunal"). The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Assessee in part. It however rejected the contention of the Assessee that it had an option not to claim depreciation for the purpose of availing of deduction under Section 80IA of the Act. The Tribunal also rejected the contention of the Assessee that the loan received by it from Aequa Minerals (P) Ltd. (for short "AMPL") could not be held to be a "deemed dividend" under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal, the Revenue has filed the present appeal.

(3.) The appeal was admitted by this Court by an order dt. 24th June, 2002 as to one substantial question of law. Thereafter, the Assessee filed an application being Civil Appln. No. 599 of 2005 requesting the Court for framing an additional substantial question of law. By our order dt. 23rd Aug., 2010, the civil application was allowed and one additional substantial question of law was framed.