1989 (9) TMI 86

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g that the assessee was not entitled to the deduction of surtax payable by it in pursuance of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, in arriving at the taxable income ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that, for the purpose of computing capital employed for deduction under section 80J, liabilities are not to be deducted ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that, for the purpose of relief under section 80J, the computation of capital should be based on average amounts of increase/decrease in the assets and liabilities during the relevant previous year?" The brief factual....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s be taken during the year instead of the value-of the assets and liabilities as on the first day of the previous year. The Tribunal also accepted the additional ground raised by the assessee that, for the purpose of computing relief under section 80J, the original cost of the fixed assets be taken into account in the computation of the capital employed and not their written down value. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the relevant record. The controversy whether the assessee was entitled to deduction of surtax while computing its taxable income for the relevant assessment year is not only covered by the decision of this court in Highway Cycle Industries v. CIT [1989] 178 ITR 601, but also by the decisions ....