evolawyer/inlegalbert-sc-ner-silver huggingface dataset:
(2008] 1 S.C.R. 637

,... • ~

OSWAL WOOLEN MILLS LTD A

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ANR. - (C.A. No. 2335 of 2006)

JANUARY 11, 2008

(S.B. SINHA AND HARJIT SINGH BEDI, JJ.) 4

Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948: ' ss. 46 and 49 - Electricity tariff - Levy of surcharge - Clarification of judgment dated 28.4.2006*- HELD: Company c

is liable to pay and has paid actual amount of surcharge with effect from the date of expiry of one year from 13. 5. 1992 - Surcharge @ 17Y2% was not required to be paid in term of the tariff Notification dated 1.2.1994.

*Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd. Vs. Punjab State Electricity D

..../.

Board & Anr. [2006] 1 Supp. S CR 480 - referred to.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : I.A. No. 91 In Civil Appeal No. 2335 of 2006.

E Mahindera Anand, Neeraj Kumar Jain, Bharat Singh, - Sarijay Singh, Sandeep Chaturvedi and Ugra Shankar Prasad, for the Appellant.

i Ruchi Gour Narula, Ruchi Kohli and Rajiv Nanda for the F Respondents.

,!I

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

ORDER

1. This application has been filed for clarification of a 0 judgment and order dated 28.04.2006 passed by a Division "i Bench of this Court in Civil Appeal No. 2335 of 2006.

2. The clarification has been sought for on the issue as to whether 13.05.1992 was the cut-off date for commencement of 637 H

SUPREME COURT REPORTS

[2008] 1 S.C.R.

~ •

~ A the period of one year for converting supply from 11 KV to 33

KV or higher voltage or the surcharge was actually payable with effect from the said date.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we

B are of the opinion that the Company is liable to pay the surcharge with effect from the date of expiry of one year from 13. 05.1992 and not from 13.05.1992 itself. The relevant paragraph of the judgment of this Court, accordingly, may be substituted by the following: • c 'For the reasons aforementioned, although Mr. R.K. Jain, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the company, may be right in his submission that the Board has no jurisdiction to levy surcharge after 29.01.1992, but as the said contention had not been raised and furthermore as notice was issued by the

D court on a limited question, we are of the opinion that the company is liable to pay the surcharge with effect from the date of expiry of one year from 13.05.1992. We may furthermore

)o.

notice that the actual amount of surcharge payable from that date has already been paid by the company to the Board.

E However, in view of our findings aforementioned, there cannot be any doubt that the surcharge @ 17 %% was not required to be paid in terms of the tariff notification dated 01.02.1994.' - The I.A. is disposed of accordingly.

R.P.

Interlocutory Application disposed of. "
(2008) 2 S.C.R. 650

~ _...,, .

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

AHMEDABAD

'II.

A~VIND POLYCOT LTD. (Civil Appeal No. 1182 of 2008) B

FEBRUARY 8, 2008

[S.H. KAPADIA AND B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, JJ.]

J..

Income Tax Act, 1961 - s.36(i)(iii) - Interest paid in c respect of borrowings on capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year - Held : Is allowable deduction.

The question which arose of consideration in the present appeal is : Whether interest paid in respect of borrowings on capital assets not put to use in the

D concerned financial year can be permitted as allowable deduction under Section 36(1) (iii) of the Income-Tax Act, A 1961?

Dismissing the appeal, the Court

E HELD: Interest paid in respect of borrowings on capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year is allowable deduction under s.36(1 )(iii) of the -: Income-Tax Act, 1961. [Para 2] [651-8, C]

Dy. Commnr. of Income Tax, Ahmedabad v. Mis. Core

F Health Care Ltd. 2008(2) Scale 327 - relied on. )..

CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1182 of 2008.

From the Judgment and Order dated 19.10.2005 of the

G High Court of judicature of Gujarat atAhmedabad in Tax Appeal

No. 526 of 2003. ,,.,

P. Vishwanatha Shetty, T. Srinivasa Murthy, Gaurav Agrawal and B.V. Balaram Das for the Appellant.

H 650

...

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 651, AHMEDABAD v. ARVIND POLYCOT LTD. [KAPADIA, J.]

S. Ganesh, Amar Dave, Rustom B. Hathikhanawala, E.C.

A Agrawala. J.P. Shah, Manish Shah, Harish J. Jhaveri, Pardiwala, Jay Savla and Reena Bagga for the Respondent.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

KAPADIA, J. 1. Leave granted.

2. In this civil appeal filed by the Department the question of law arises for determination which question is as follows:

"Whether interest paid in respect of borrowings on capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year can 1 c be permitted as allowable deduction under Section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?"

3. Our answer to the above-mentioned question is squarely ' covered by our decision in favour of the assessee and against the Department in the case of Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, D Ahmedabad v. Mis. Core Health Care Ltd. in Civil Appeal , Nos.3952-55 of 2002.

4. Accordingly the said question is answered in favour of assessee and against the Department. Consequently the • Department's civil appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

D.G.

Appeal dismissed.
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 652

A C.l.T., BARODA

.J .+,

II.

ISHWAR BHUVAN HOTELS LTD., BARODA (Civil Appeal No. 2594 of 2006)

FEBRUARY 8, 2008

[S.H. KAPADIA AND 8. SUDERSHAN REDDY, JJ.]

-+ Income Tax Act, 1961 ..... s. 36 (1) (iii)- Borrowing on capital • assets not put to use in the concerned financial year- Interest c paid on - Whether can be permitted as allowable deduction under the provision - Held: Yes.

Dy. Commnr. of Income Tax, Ahmedabad vs. Mis. Core Health Care Ltd. in Civil Appeal Nos. 3952-55 of 2002 decided by Supreme Court on 8.2.2008relied on.

D CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.2594 of 2006.

From the final Judgment and Order dated 19.10.2005 of . ;.

the High Court of Gujarat atAhmedabad in Tax Appeal No. 529/

E 2003.

P. Vishwanatha Shetty, T. Srinivasa Murthy, Gaurav Agrawal and B.V. Balaram Das for the Appellant. ' ' E.C. Agrawala for the Respondent.

F The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

KAPADIA, J. 1. In this civil appeal filed by the Department the question of law arises for determination which question is as follows:

G "Whether interest paid in respect of borrowings on capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year can )- be permitted as allowable deduction under Section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?"

H 652

C.l.T., BARODA v. ISHWAR BHUVAN HOTELS LTD., 653

BARODA [KAPADIA, J.]

2. Our answer to the above-mentioned question is squarely A covered by our decision in favour of the assessee and against the Department in the case of Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Ahmedabad v. Mis. Core Health Care Ltd. in Civil Appeal Nos.3952-55 of 2002. ·

3. Accordingly the above question is answered in favour B of assessee and against the Department. Consequently the Department's civil appeal is dismissed with no order as to cost.

K.K.T.

Appeal dismissed. c
[2008] 3 S.C.R. 141

T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

(I.A. No. 2016 of 2007)

FEBRUARY 21, 2008

B ,

(K.G. 6ALAKRISHNAN, CJ., DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT -'

AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.)

Environment Protection Act, 1986:

s.3(3) - Setting up of Central Empowered Committee - C In order to examine the cases of illegal felling of trees, prohibiting mining activities inside National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries and other forest areas and reguleting

establishment of new wood-based industries - Committee constituted, as mentioned in the order - Term of office of CEC D would be three years.

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICITON: I.A. No.2016 of2007 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995 Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

E G.E. Vahanvati, Sol. Genl. for India, R. Mohan, A.S.G., Harish N. Salve, (A.C.), U.U. Lalit, (A.C.), K.Amareswari, Ranjit Kumar, V.B. Singh, K.K. Venugopal, Shobha Dixit, Siddhartha''~.

Chowdhury (A.C.), P.K. Manohar, Tapesh Kumar Singh, Dinesh Chandra Pandey, Ajit Kumar Sinha, Haris Beeran (for F.

F . Parmeswaran). Virendra Parmar, Sunita Singh, Varun, Shefali

Jain, Binu Tamta, Sushma Suri, Ng. J.R. Luwang, Riku Sarma (for M/s. Corporate Law Group), S.U.K. Sagar, Bina Madhavan, Hemal K. Sheth, (for Mis. Lawyers' Knit & Co.), Manish .

Goswami, Ashok Panigrahi (for M/s. MAP & Co.}, s:· Balaji, G Lakshmi Jayashankar, M.L. Lahoty Paban K. Sharma, Rachana Srivastava, Rani Chhabra, Anil Kr. Jha, (M/s. Fox Mandal & Co.~. J.K. Bhatia, Sridhar Potaraju, Pramod Dayal, Anil Kr. Srivastava, • Ritu Raj, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, V.K. Verma, Ajit Pudussery,

141 H

SUPREME COURT REPORTS


A G. Prakash, Suparna Srivastava, Manish Sharma, Rajesh Srivastava, Jitendra Mohan Sharma and Gopal Singh for the appearing parties.

1 . We have considered the suggestions given by learned Solicitor General and learned Amicus Curiae regarding the 8 constitution of the Central Empowered Committee. The

composition of CEC shall be as follows:

The Order of the Court was delivered

(1) Shri P.V. Jayakrishnan, Chairman

(2) Shri P.R. Mohanty, Director General of Forests, MoEF

(3) Shri M.K. Jiwrajka, Member Secretary

(4) Shri S.K. Patnaik

D (5) Dr. M.K. Muttoo

(6) Shri Mahendar Vyas

(7) Shri Sanjeev Chaddha (Deputy Secretary)

2. Shri M.K. Jiwrajka is on deputation as of today as he belongs to the cadre of the Forest Officials in the State of Maharashtra which deputation is ordered to be continued till 31.3.2009.

3. Term of office of CEC would be three years or until further F orders, whichever is earlier.

R.P. lnteralocutory application disposed of.
I I

[2008] 4 S.C.R. 609

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

MIS. SANKESHWAR HOSIERY INDUSTRY

(Civil Appeal No. 1816 of 2008)

MARCH 7, 2008 B

[S.H. KAPADIA AND B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, JJ.]

Punjab General Sales Tax rules, 1949 - r. 29 (xii) - Deduction from taxable turnover - Permissibility- Held: Such deduction permissible. c

State of Punjab and Ors. etc. etc. v. Mis. Perfect Synthetics etc. etc. - 2008 (4) SCR 582 - relied on.

CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1816 of2008 D From the Judgment and Order dated 18.8.2006 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in C.W.P. No. 12760/2006

Mahabir Singh, S. Ganesh, Dalip Singh Brar, Ajay Pal, E Nikhil Jain, S.P. Singh Chauhan, Sanjay Jain, Ashok Kumar Singh, Surender Dutt Sharma, Naresh Kr. Gaur, S.B. Meitei, See raj Bagga, S. Bagga and M .P. Devnath for the appearing parties.

...

y The Judgment of the Court was delivered by F

KAPADIA, J. Leave granted.

In view of our decision in the case of State of Punjab & Others etc. etc. v. iVi/s. Perfect Synthetics etc. etc. - Civil Appeal No.1072 of 2008, the civil appeal is dism; ssed witli nc ( order as to costs.

K.K.T.

Appea! 'j , sr.1iss.::•