In Commissioner Of Income Tax - 12, Mumbai v. M/S.tempus Investments, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 2.The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.891 OF 2011
Commissioner of Income Tax - 12, Mumbai..Appellant.
Versus
M/s.Tempus Investments
..Respondent.
Mr.Vimal Gupta with Smt.Padma Divakar for the appellant.Mr.K.B. Bhujle for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &K.K. Tated, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 8th September 2011
1.In the present case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has restored the matter to the file of the assessing officer in the light of judgment of this Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited reported in 328 ITR 81. Since the Tribunal has restored the matter to the file of the assessing officer, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal. The fact that the Revenue has not accepted the decision of this Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited and SLP filed by the Revenue is pending in the Supreme Court cannot be a ground to entertain this appeal.
2.The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
(K.K. Tated, J.)
(J.P. Devadhar, 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.
EaseValue