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 0, Cited by 2]

Gujarat High Court

Gujarat Ambuja Cotspin Ltd vs A.C.I.T on 25 January, 2002

Author: K.A.Puj

Bench: K.A.Puj

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD



     TAX APPEAL No 73 of 2002




     --------------------------------------------------------------
     GUJARAT AMBUJA COTSPIN LTD.
Versus
     A.C.I.T.
     --------------------------------------------------------------
     Appearance:
     1. TAX APPEAL No. 73 of 2002
          MR SN SOPARKAR, SR. ADVOCATE WITH
          MRS SWATI SOPARKAR for Appellant
          MR BB NAIK for Respondent


     --------------------------------------------------------------


              CORAM : MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI
                                 and
                      MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ


              Date of Order: 25/01/2002


ORAL ORDER

(Per : MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI) Absent. No substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

JANUARY 25, 2002[R.K.ABICHANDANI, J.] [K.A.PUJ, J.] After the above order is made, the learned counsel for the appellant has appeared before us and submitted that, in respect of an identical question, an appeal has been admitted. He places on record copy of the notice in Tax Appeal No. 481 of 1999, which shows that the question similar to the question No.1 suggested in the present appeal has been framed as a question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal. We therefore recall the earlier order passed today and in view of the order made in Tax Appeal No. 481 of 1999 on 30th August 2000, admit this appeal and formulate the following questions of law :

"(1) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that expenditure on the issue of convertible debentures is a capital expenditure?
(2) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that expenditure on the issue of non-convertible debentures should be allowed proportionately in each year over the period of redemption of the debentures?"

ADMIT. To be heard with Tax Appeal No. 481 of 1999.

JANUARY 25, 2002[R.K.ABICHANDANI, J.] [K.A.PUJ, J.] parmar*