Dehradun And Another v. M/S Saipem Spa
High Court
08 Dec 2003 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Dehradun And Another v. M/S Saipem Spa
Date of order
08 Dec 2003
Assessment year(s)
1989-1990
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Dehradun And Another v. M/S Saipem Spa, the High Court (2003) decided the matter.
Decision: Accordingly, appeal is disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL
Income Tax Appeal No. 516 of 2001
The Commissioner of Income-Tax,
Dehradun and another
………………. Appellants
Versus
M/s Saipem SPA C/o M/s Arthar Andersen & Company, 66 Marker Towers F, Curre Parade,
Bombay
……………….. Respondent
Mr. S.K. Posti, Advocate for the petitinoers. None for the respondent.
Coram: Hon’ble S.H. Kapadia, C.J. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J.
Date: 08.12.2003
PC:-
This appeal concerns assessment Year 1989-1990.
Affidavit of service is taken on recored and marked ‘X’.
In view of our judgment dated 14[th] October 2003 in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Ltd. in Income Tax Appeal No. 12 of 2003 and others, both the questions are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department.
Accordingly, appeal is disposed of.
HN
(M.M. Ghildiyal, J.)
(S.H. Kapadia, C.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