REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Appellant

V/S

CENTURY ENKA LTD. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

JUGGILAL KAMALAPAT COTTON SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS CO. LTD. V. TEXTILES COMMITTEE,BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
MADRAS PROVINCE V. BODDU PAIDANNA AND SONS [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED VS. DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS COMPANY LIMITED :GANESH FLOUR MILLS CO LIMITED DELHI:MODI SUGAR MILLS:DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
KALWA DEVADATTAM KALWA DEVADATTAM VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MADRAS VS. A GAJAPATHY NAIDU MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MADHYA PRADESH NAGPUR AND BHANDARA NAGPUR VS. SWADESHI COTTON AND FLOUR MILLS PRIVATE LTD [REFERRED TO]
KESORAM INDUSTRIES AND COTTON MILLS LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX CENTRAL CALCUTTA [REFERRED TO]
SHINDE BROTHER VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER RATCHUR [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX MADHYA PRADESH INDORE VS. JASWANT SINGH CHARAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
KEDARNATH JUTE MFG COMPANY LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CALCUTTA [REFERRED TO]
AVADH SUGAR MILLS LIMITED VS. SALES TAX OFFICER SITAPUR [REFERRED TO]
PORRITTS AND SPENCER ASIA LIMITED VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
J K SYNTHETICS LIMITED VS. BAJPAI O S ITO [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. ROYAL BOOT HOUSE [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN STEEL AND WIRE PRODUCTS LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. ORISSA FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. WEST INDIA STEEL COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
WALLACE BROTHERS AND CO LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this reference, under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73, the following questions have been referred to this court:

(2.) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that nylon was petrochemical within the meaning of item (18) of the Vth Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, and that the assessee was entitled to higher development rebate in respect of plant and machinery installed for the production of nylon for the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73 ?"

(3.) In these circumstances, the ITO held that the liability had not accrued or become ascertained during the relevant accounting year. The AAC, on the other hand, accepted the contention of the assessee and allowed these two sums as deduction.

Click here to view full judgment.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. CENTURY ENKA LTD

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address