Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.24 seconds)Cit vs M/S Meghalaya Steels Ltd on 9 March, 2016
10. B e f o r e p a r t i n g , we wa n t t o a d d t h a t
t h e j u d g me n t o f t h e H o n ' b l e S u p r e me C o u r t i n
the case of CIT Vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd.
( s u p r a ) , c o p y o f wh i c h wa s p r o v i d e d t o u s b y
the learned counsel f or the assessee during
the course of hearing, stating that the issue
of excise duty ref und has been decided in
f avour of the assessee in this j u d g me n t
a r i s i n g o u t o f t h e j u d g me n t o f G a u h a t i H i g h
Court in the case of Meghalaya Steels Ltd.
(supra). We observe that in this case bef ore
the Hon'ble Apex Court, the only issue
d e c i d e d wa s i n r e s p e c t o f t h e a l l o wa b i l i t y o f
transport subsidy, interest subsidy and
p o we r s u b s i d y f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f d e d u c t i o n
under section 80IB of the Act and not that of
excise duty ref und. Though no help of the
s a i d j u d g me n t c a n b e t a k e n i n t h e p r e s e n t
appeal, this also goes to show that the
decision of the Gauhati High Court wi t h
r e g a r d t o t h e e x c i s e d u t y r e f u n d h a s b e c o me
f inal.
Section 80B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1