Appellants v. Ongc As Agent Of
High Court
26 Jul 2004 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Appellants v. Ongc As Agent Of
Date of order
26 Jul 2004
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Appellants v. Ongc As Agent Of, the High Court (2004) dismissed the appeal.
Issue: The question there was whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the multiple stage grossing up of income was not applicable to the notional income under Section 44BB read with Section 195A of the Income Tax Act.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL
Income Tax Appeal No. 45 of 2001
(Old No. 53/2000)
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut & another.
..........
Appellants
Versus
ONGC as agent of
Mr. Bougourousl Anov Kons, C/o V.V.C. Machino, USSR, Tel Bhawan, Dehradun. .......... Respondent
Mr. S.K. Posti, learned counsel for the appellants. Mr. J.P. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent.
Hon’ble V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J., Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J.
Mr. S.K. Posti, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue very fairly says that the question involved in this appeal is directly covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Justice S.H. Kapadia and Hon’ble Justice Irshad Hussain reported in Volume 264 ITR Page 340 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax & another Vs O.N.G.C.
The question there was whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the multiple stage grossing up of income was not applicable to the notional income under Section 44BB read with Section 195A of the Income Tax Act. The learned Judges had decided the question in favour of the assessee.
We do not see any reason to take any different view than the one taken by our esteemed brothers.
The appeal is dismissed. The question of law referred is answered in favour of the assessee.
(P.C. Verma, J.) (V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J.)
Dt. 26.07.2004
G
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.