Case Law › High Court › Ita/546/2011 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Ita/546/2011 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Ericsson India Pvt Ltd

High Court 13 Sep 2011 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · dhcdb

Parties

Date of order

13 Sep 2011

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/546/2011 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Ericsson India Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2011) 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

13.09.2011 ^ b t Present: Mr.Kamal Sawhney, Adv. for [the ][Appellant/Revenue.]Mr.M.S.Syali, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Mahua [Kalra, ][Ms.Husnal]Syali and Mr.Rahul Sateeja, Advocates [for ][the]Respondent/Assessee. CM No.5578/2011 [(for ]Condonation of [Delay ][of ][473 ][days ][in ][re-] filing the appeal) There is a delay of 473 days in re-filing the [appeal. ][The] only explanation [given ]is that the [paper book was sent ][to ][the]Department as there was an objection [raised regarding ][the ][dim]annexures. We fail to appreciate that it took [one ][and half ][years ][to ][type] the annexures. We may also note that the expense in [issue ][is ][only ][to ][the] tune of Rs.1,13,000/- on [purchase ][and ][maintenance ][of ][software]and thus the tax effect is much below [4 ][lakhs'] Dismissed. + ITA No.546/2011 * Dismissed in view of what we have observed [aforesaid.] F* SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. SEPTEMBER 13, 2OII dm ?%*Uy'-u*/RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. Signature Not Verified

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.