Commissioner Of Income Tax Shimla v. M/S Teknika Components
High Court
21 Sep 2015 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · cmis
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax Shimla v. M/S Teknika Components
Date of order
21 Sep 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax Shimla v. M/S Teknika Components, the High Court (2015) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether approved for reporting ?[1] For the appellant: Mr.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
ITA No. 23 of 2009.
Date of decision: 21[st] September, 2015.
Commissioner of Income Tax Shimla
Versus
M/s Teknika Components
…..Appellant. …Respondent
Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice.The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting ?[1]
For the appellant:
Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Vandana Kuthiala and Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocates.
For the respondent:
Mr. Aditya Sood, proxy Advocate.
_______________________________________________________
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral)
It is stated at the Bar by the learned counsel for the appellant that the question arising in this appeal was subject matter of ITA No. 37 of 2006 which came to be decided by this Court on 5.1.2010. Feeling aggrieved Ms. Teknika Components filed Civil Appeal No. 8211 of 2011 before the apex Court which was disposed of by the apex Court on 23.9.2011, copy of judgment is already on the record at page 36 of the paper-book. 2. Accordingly, the ITA is disposed of alongwith pending applications and the matter is remitted to Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
(Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice.
September 21, 2015. (cm Thakur)
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge.
1Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.
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.