Case LawHigh Court › Appellants v. O.n.g.c., Dehradun

Appellants v. O.n.g.c., Dehradun

High Court 21 May 2004 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Appellants v. O.n.g.c., Dehradun
Date of order
21 May 2004
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Appellants v. O.n.g.c., Dehradun, the High Court (2004) decided the matter.

Decision: Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL I.T.A. No. 497 of 2001 OLD NO. 125 OF 1999 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut & another ........... Appellants Versus O.N.G.C., Dehradun As Representative of Mr. Makalouski V.V. …………Respondent Hon. P.C. Verma, A.C.J.Hon. Rajesh Tandon, J. Mr. S.K. Posti, learned counsel for the Tax Deptt. Mr. J.P. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent. The matter is squarely covered by our decision dated 30[th ]September, 2003 in Income Tax Appeal No. 470 of 2001; TheCommissioner of Income Tax, Meerut & another Vs O.N.G.C.,Dehradun. The question raised before us is as follows: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the casethe learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legallycorrect in directing to apply single stage grossing up ofthe Tax perquisites paid by ONGC on behalf of theassessee instead of multi stage grossing up, applied by theAssessing Officer under section 195-A of the Income TaxAct, 1961?" For the reasons recorded in the above judgment in IncomeTax Appeal No. 470 of 2001 dated 30[th ]September, 2003, weanswer this question in the affirmative i.e. in favour of theassessee and against the Department. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) (P.C. Verma, A.C.J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan