Case LawHigh Court › Income Tax Appeal v. M/S. Associated Bre...

Income Tax Appeal v. M/S. Associated Breweries & Distillaries …Respondentpvt.ltd

High Court 20 Feb 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Income Tax Appeal v. M/S. Associated Breweries & Distillaries …Respondentpvt.ltd
Date of order
20 Feb 2018
Assessment year(s)
1998-99
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Income Tax Appeal v. M/S. Associated Breweries & Distillaries …Respondentpvt.ltd, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

Sharayu Khot. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1011 OF 2015 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3…Appellant Versus M/s. Associated Breweries & Distillaries …RespondentPvt.Ltd. ---------- Mr. Ashok Kotangle, i/by Ms. Padma Divakar, for the Appellant. Mr. Mihir Naniwadekar, for the Respondent. ---------- CORAM :M.S. SANKLECHA &RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ. DATE : 20 February 2018 ORDER : 1.This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (“The Act” for short), challenges the order dated 19November 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 1/3 31-1-ITXA-1011-15.doc (“The Tribunal” for short). The impugned order dated 19November 2014 is in respect of Assessment Year 1998-99. 2.The copy of the order dated 19 November 2014passed by the Tribunal for deleting penalty is challenged by theRevenue in this Appeal. However, by mistake in the Appeal filedin this Court, one of the two copies of the Appeal annexed thecopy of the order dated 25 August 2009 passed by the Tribunalrelating to quantum proceedings. 3.Mr. Kotangale, the learned Counsel for the Revenue,seeks liberty to annex the correct copy of the Tribunal's orderdated 19 November 2014 which is impugned in the presentAppeal. 4.The amendment to carry out forthwith. 5.Mr. Naniwadekar, the learned Counsel for theRespondent-Assessee, has correct copy of the order dated 19November 2014, which is impugned in the present Appeal and 2/3 31-1-ITXA-1011-15.doc has no objection with the correct copy being added to theAppeal memo. 6.Reverification dispensed with. We shall nowseparately take up the Appeal for consideration. [RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J.] [M.S. SANKLECHA, J.] 3/3
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