Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Mar...

Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd

High Court 07 Dec 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd
Date of order
07 Dec 2017
Assessment year(s)
2005-06
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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 DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA No. 172/2012 + Reserved on: 11[th] November 2017 Decided on: 7th December, 2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI ....Appellant Through: Mr. Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocates. versus MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD ..... Respondent Through : Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Mr. S. Sukumaran, Mr. Anand Sukumar, Mr. Bhuwan Dhoopar, Ms. Roopali Gupta and Mr.Bhupesh Pathak, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT% 07.12.2017 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: 1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 19[th] August 2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal („ITAT‟) in ITA No.2188/Del/2010 for the AY 2005-06. 2. While admitting this appeal on 14[th] May 2013, the following question of law was framed for consideration: “Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs.23,67,21,074/- by applying provisions of section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the Custom Duty paid on import of components which were used for export by the end of the year?” 3. In view of the decision of this Court today in ITA No.250 of 2005, the above question is answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. 4. ITA No. 172 of 2012 is accordingly dismissed. DECEMBER 07, 2017 Rm S. MURALIDHAR, J. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. ITA No. 172/2012
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