Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi v. Usha Beltron Limited, Ranchi
High Court
10 Dec 2012 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jhar_pg
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi v. Usha Beltron Limited, Ranchi
Date of order
10 Dec 2012
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ranchi v. Usha Beltron Limited, Ranchi, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Therefore, this appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Tax Appeal No. 1 of 2002
Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi Vs. Usha Beltron Limited, Ranchi
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY
For the Appellant/Petitioner : M/s.D.Roshan, A.Kumar, R.KumariFor the Respondents : M/s.B.Poddar,Sr.Adv., M.Choudhary,
D.Poddar, P.Poddar, A.Sinha
------
th December, 2012
Dated 10
Learned counsel for respondent drew our attention to the order dated 6[th] November, 2012, passed by this Court in Tax Appeal No.2/2002 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi Vs. Usha Beltron Ltd., Ranchi) and submitted that the question of law as raised in this case has been answered in various judgments including the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Steel City Beverages (P) Ltd. reported in (1996) 222 ITR 744 (Pat.), Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Upasna Finance Ltd. reported in (2006) 286 ITR 179 (Mad.) and Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Margdarshi Chit Fund (P) Ltd. and the same has been followed in Tax Appeal No.2/2002. It has been held in those cases that the articles in question were independent units and those were found to be containers and in this case also, article in question is the electricity measurement meter, which is also an independent unit and therefore, this Tax Appeal can be dismissed in the light of the ratio of the above cases, which covers the present article, the electricity measurement meter.
Learned counsel for the appellant could not dispute the legal position.
Therefore, this appeal is dismissed.
(Prakash Tatia, C.J.)
(Jaya Roy, J.)
dey
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.