Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [2009]313ITR384(MP)
1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessee in respect of the following question of law:Whether the Tribunal is right in law in holding that deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I was not available on interest received on short-term deposit of money, on investment in IDBI and on security deposit with M.P.E.B. for supply of H.T. electricity.2. We have heard Mr. Sandesh Jain, learned Counsel for the appellant-assessee and Mr. Sanjai Lal, learned Counsel for the respondent-Revenue.3. Mr. Sandesh Jain, learned Counsel for the assessee-applicant, submitted that he has instructions to withdraw the reference. He has commended us to the decision rendered in Gajadhar Prasad Nathu Lal v. CWT : [1970]76ITR615(MP) , wherein the learned Chief Justice, speaking for the court after referring to the decision rendered in M.M. Ispahani Ltd. v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax : [1955]27ITR188(Cal) , Arise...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (2008)17VST465(MP)
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. Regard being had to the similitude and interconnectivity of the controversy that is involved in this batch of writ petitions it is disposed of by a singular order. It is condign to state at the outset that in some of the writ petitions, the constitutional validity of the provisions contained in the M.P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (for brevity, 'the 1976 Act') is called in question and prayer has been made to declare the entire enactment ultra vires Articles 301 and 304(b) of the Constitution and in some of the writ petitions the assail is to the constitutional validity of the notifications issued under the 1976 Act on the foundation that they invite the frown on Article 301 of the Constitution and also fall foul of Article 14 of the Constitution. Keeping in view the nature of the challenge and the contours of the attack I will advert to the issue of validity of the Act first and thereafter I shall dwell upon the substantiality and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009MP207; 2009(3)MPHT304; 2009[15]STR3; [2009]22STT105; (2009)22VST170(MP); 2009(5)AIRKarR498
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions, the constitutional validity of Section 65(76b) of the Finance Act, 1994 (for short, 'the Act') as amended by the Finance Act, 2005 was challenged primarily and principally on the ground that there is lack of legislative competence on the part of the concerned Legislature to bring in such a legislation and further, assuming the legislation meets the test of legislative competence, it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The aforesaid writ petitions were listed along with W. A. No. 1524 of 2007.2. In the course of hearing of the writ appeal, on behalf of the appellant therein, it was contended that the decision rendered by the Division Bench in Vindhyachal Distellaries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of M.P. [2007] 7 VST 197 (MP) has not appropriately considered the decision rendered in Som Distilleries and Breweries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of M.P. [1997] 1 ILJ 319 and various other aspects which deserve consideration. The Divisio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(3)MPHT374
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. These two appeals have been preferred under Section 2(1) of the M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, challenging the defensibility and sustainability of the order dated 8-8-2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 8723/2007 and W.P. No. 8726/2007. Be it noted, the learned Single Judge has disposed of both the writ petitions in a composite manner and adverted to the facts in Writ Petition No. 8726/2007. As in Writ Appeal No. 960/2008 the assail is to order passed in Writ Petition No. 8726/2007, for the sake of clarity and convenience, we shall advert to the material facts and grounds urged in the said appeal.2. The appellant is the owner of the land bearing Survey No. 957 admeasuring area 1.58 hectares at Village Morghari, District Khandwa. The said land was diverted by order dated 3-11-2005 under Section 172 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short 'the Code') for construction of godown. The petitioner has availed a...
Tag this Judgment!