Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 v. M/S.indian Oil Corporation Ltd
High Court
06 Mar 2014 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 v. M/S.indian Oil Corporation Ltd
Date of order
06 Mar 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 v. M/S.indian Oil Corporation Ltd, the High Court (2014) decided the matter.
Issue: C. : 1Having heard Mr.Pinto at some length, we find that his persuasion will not enable us to consider as to whether any substantial question of law arises for determination and consideration.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
bsb
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1172 OF 2013
Commissioner of Income Tax-10
… Appellant
v/s
M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
… Respondent
Mr.Arvind Pinto for the appellant.
Mr.R. Murlidhar a/with Mr.A.K. Jasani for the respondent.
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & G.S. KULKARNI, JJ.DATED : 6TH MARCH, 2014
P. C. :
1Having heard Mr.Pinto at some length, we find that his persuasion will not enable us to consider as to whether any substantial question of law arises for determination and consideration. The assessment year in question is 1988-1989. The case pertains to Indian Oil Corporation which is a public sector undertaking. The proceedings in this assessment year finally concluded by an order passed by the Tribunal in the year 2012. It
would, therefore, be appropriate to keep the question of law which is
tried to be raised before us open for being considered in an appropriate case. Since all the records and proceedings are fairly in a old case that too of a public sector Corporation, we are of the opinion that, by keeping the issue open for being considered in an appropriate case, this appeal deserves to be disposed of. It is accordingly disposed of.
(G.S. KULKARNI, J.)
(S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
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.