Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Hughes Services (F.e.), Pvt. Ltd
High Court
19 Dec 2005 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Hughes Services (F.e.), Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
19 Dec 2005
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Hughes Services (F.e.), Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2005) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT-NAINITAL.
Income Tax Appeal No. 22 of 2000
1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut,
2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,
Special Circle, Dehradun. …. Appellants.
Vs.
Hughes Services (F.E.), Pvt. Ltd.
As agent of Mr. Fields Shown, Dehradun. … Respondent.
Sri S.K. Posti, learned counsel for the appellants. Sri Arvind Vashishtha Ad. and Sri A. Chatterji, Adv. For the respondent.
Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J.
Heard learned counsel for both the parties.
The assessee has filed the present appeal u/s 26oA of
Income Tax Act against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITAT no. 1647/D/94.
Though, several question have been framed in the memo
of appeal but in substance the only question involve in this appeal is that whether the amount paid to the assessee for off period salary shall be included in the income accrued in view of the explanation of Section 9(i) (ii) of the Act 1961?
Since the said question has already been decided by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal nos. 351-355 of 2005
with the connected Civil Appeals, Sedco Forex International
Drill Inc. and ors. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun and another reported in Judgment Today 2005(9) SC 639, this appeal is decided on the same terms and conditions and the question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. No order as to costs.
The appeal is decided accordingly.
(B.S. Verma, J.) (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.)
December 19, 2005:NCM:
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.
EaseValue