Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

M/S Shiv Shakti Flour Missl (P) Ltd. ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 30 January, 2020

Bench: A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi

                                                              1

                                           IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                       CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2899-2902/2011

                         M/S SHIV SHAKTI FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD.                      APPELLANT(S)

                                                             VERSUS

                         COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX                                RESPONDENT(S)

                                                           O R D E R

1. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. These appeals take exception to the judgment and order dated 15.09.2009 passed by the High Court of Gauhati at Gauhati in I.T.A. Nos.8/2006, 6/2007, 7/2007 and 8/2007. The assessment years involved in these appeals are from 1997-1998 to 2000-2001.

3. The issue involved in these appeals is whether transport subsidy received by the assessee during the aforesaid assessment years is in the nature of revenue receipt or capital receipt.

4. In respect of same assessee, the High Court in Income Tax Appeal No.6/2014 for the subsequent assessment year 2001-2002 has answered the question on the basis of the exposition of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by CHARANJEET KAUR Date: 2020.02.17 18:03:36 IST this Court in particular in ‘Jai Bhagwan Oil & Reason: Flour Mills vs. Union of India & Ors.’ reported in (2009) 14 SCC 63. Admittedly, this decision is 2 accepted by the Department and no appeal is preferred against the same.

5. The principle stated in paragraph 23 of the said decision in the case of the same assessee which has been allowed to become final, the view expounded therein must apply proprio vigore even for the assessment years in question. As a result, in the facts of the present case, these appeals succeed on the same terms.

6. As a consequence of the above, since the issue stands concluded in favour of the assessee there would be no need to continue with the reassessment on that score.

7. The appeals and pending applications are disposed of accordingly.

..................,J.

(A.M. KHANWILKAR) ..................,J.

                                                   (AJAY RASTOGI)
NEW DELHI
JANUARY 30, 2020
                                         3

ITEM NO.110                    COURT NO.6                   SECTION XIV-A

                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F           I N D I A
                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                 Civil Appeal      No(s).      2899-2902/2011

M/S SHIV SHAKTI FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD.                      Appellant(s)

                                     VERSUS

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX                                  Respondent(s)

Date : 30-01-2020 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Appellant(s) Ms. Kavita Jha, AOR Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Adv. Mr. Udit Naresh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Dhruv Agarwal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeals and pending applications are disposed of in terms of the signed order.


           (NEETU KHAJURIA)                              (VIDYA NEGI)
             COURT MASTER                                COURT MASTER

(Signed order is placed on the file.)