Case LawHigh Court › Ita/42/2012 M/S. Philips Electronics Ind...

Ita/42/2012 M/S. Philips Electronics India Limited v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata – Iv, Kolkata & Anr

High Court 05 Mar 2024 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · calcutta_original_side
Parties
Ita/42/2012 M/S. Philips Electronics India Limited v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata – Iv, Kolkata & Anr
Date of order
05 Mar 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/42/2012 M/S. Philips Electronics India Limited v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata – Iv, Kolkata & Anr, the High Court (2024) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: 4.In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE O – 31 ITA/42/2012M/S. PHILIPS ELECTRONICS INDIA LIMITEDVERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA – IV, KOLKATA & ANR. BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANIANDTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJDate : 5[th] March 2024. Appearance: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior AdvocateMr. Sanjay Bhomik, AdvocateMr. A. K. Dey, Advocate… for the appellant.Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate… for the respondents. 1.Heard Sri J. P. Khaitan, learned senior advocate, assisted by Sri SanjayBhowmik and Sri A. K. De, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Smita Das De, learned senior standing counsel for the respondents. 2.On 13.02.2014, this Court passed the following order:- “List in the Monthly List of March, 2024, as prayed by learnedcounsel for the appellant to enable him to take instructions as towhether pursuant to the remand order, the order has been passedby the assessing officer.” 3.Today, Sri J. P. Khaitan, learned senior advocate states on instructionsthat pursuant to the impugned remand order of the Tribunal, the assessing officer has not passed any order and the limitation for passingorder has also expired. Therefore, the appellant does not want to pressthis appeal. Learned counsel for the respondents does not oppose theaforesaid request of the appellant. 4.In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed. (SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J.) S. Kumar (RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.)
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