(S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta, JJ.)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8554/2016, decided on May 17, 2023
Commissioner of Income Tax-I ________________________ Petitioner;
v.
Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd. __________________ Respondent.
With
SLP(C) No. 14189/2017 (III)
SLP(C) No. 18872/2017 (III)
(For Admission and I.R. and IA No. 55774/2017-Condonation of Delay in Filing and IA No. 55777/2017-Exemption From Filing C/C of the Impugned Judgment)
SLP(C) No. 22586/2017 (III)
(For Condonation of Delay in Filing on IA 43674/2017
For Exemption From Filing C/C of the Impugned Judgment on IA 43676/2017)
SLP(C) No. 25241/2019 (IX)
(For Application for Permission on IA 113546/2020
IA No. 113546/2020 – Application For Permission)
SLP(C) No. 25429/2019 (IX)
SLP(C) No. 1561/2018 (III)
IA No. 107386/2017 – Exemption From Filing C/C of the Impugned Judgment)
SLP(C) No. 7397/2021 (XII)
(For Admission and I.R.)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8554/2016; TA No. 799/2010; SLP(C) No. 14189/2017 (III); SLP(C) No. 18872/2017 (III); IA No. 55774/2017; IA No. 55777/2017; SLP(C) No. 22586/2017 (III); IA 43674/2017; IA 43676/2017; SLP(C) No. 25241/2019 (IX); IA 113546/2020; IA No. 113546/2020; SLP(C) No. 25429/2019 (IX); SLP(C) No. 1561/2018 (III); IA No. 107386/2017; and SLP(C) No. 7397/2021 (XII)
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
SLP(C) No. 8554/2016, SLP(C) No. 14189/2017
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the High Court.
3. The special leave petitions are dismissed.
4. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
SLP(C) No. 18872/2017, SLP(C) No. 22586/2017, SLP(C) No. 25241/2019, SLP(C) No. 25429/2019, SLP(C) No. 1561/2018
5. Delay condoned.
6. The special leave petitions are dismissed in the light of orders of this Court in Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax v. Munjal Auto in C.A. No. 6226/2013 and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nirma Ltd. in C.A. No. 10450/2017.
7. The order in Munjal Auto relied upon judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chaphalkar Brothers, 2018 (13 SCC) 358.
8. This Court is also satisfied that the terms of the scheme in this case require the recipient of the benefit to set up a new unit or substantially expand the existing unit and utilize substantial portion of the amount retained (at least 50% of the subsidy) for the capital purposes.
9. For these reasons, the impugned judgment does not call for interference.
10. The special leave petitions are dismissed.
11. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
SLP(C) No. 7397/2021
12. De-tag the matter and list on 18.07.2023.
———
