Ita/279/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Givaudan Flavours India Pvt Ltd
High Court
17 Apr 2015 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Ita/279/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Givaudan Flavours India Pvt Ltd
Date of order
17 Apr 2015
Assessment year(s)
2002-03
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/279/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Givaudan Flavours India Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2015) 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17 DAY OF APRIL, 2015.
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN
AND|
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
ITA NO.279/2014
BETWEHR
1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
LTU, JSS TOWERS, BSK II STAGE,|
BANGALORE.
2.THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,LTU, JSS TOWERS, BSK II STAGE,|LTU, JSS TOWERS, BSK II STAGE,|
BANGALORE.
.. APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.)
AND
M/S. GIVAUDAN FLAVOURSINDIA PVT. LTD.,401, AKRUTI CENTRE POINT! FLOOR, MIDC CENRAL ROAD,MIDC, ANDHEIR(&),MUMBA I-400 093.
~~RESPONDENT.
THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SKC.260-A OF INCOME TAX.ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED: 31.01.2014 PASSED INITA NO.8007/MUM/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03|PRAYING TO:.
I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW;Il ALLOW THER APPBAL AND SEBT ASIDE THR ORDERPASSED BY THE ITAT, MUMBAI IN ITA NO.8007/MUM/2011|DATED,41.01.2014CONFIRMINGTHERORDERQO)THEAPPELLATE COMMISSIONKR AND CONFIRM THR ORDER!PASSED BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU,|MUMBAL.
THISITACOMINGONKOR,ORDERSTHIS|VINEFET SARAJDELIVERED THER FOLLOWING:
DAY, |
JUDGMENT
The office has reported that since the order has been passedby the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, this Courtwill not have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal.
2Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the appellantshas submitted that the assessee has now shifted from Mumbai
within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. However,admittedly, this case relates to prior to his shifting and as such heaerees that this Court will not have jurisdiction to entertain thisappeal.
4As such, the appeal isdismissedon the ground ofjurisdiction. Liberty is however given to the appellants to file anappeal before the High Court, having jurisdiction.
Sd/-|JUDGESd/-JUDGE|TL
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.