Case Law › High Court › Ita/9/2023 Of Principal Commissioner Of...

Ita/9/2023 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Dehradun v. M/S Schlumberger Solution Pvt Ltd

High Court 25 Jul 2023 In favour of: Unclear

Forum / Bench

High Court · ukhcucis_pg

Parties

Date of order

25 Jul 2023

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Other

Case summary

In Ita/9/2023 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Dehradun v. M/S Schlumberger Solution Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.

Decision: Bhatia submits that the department has already challenged the aforesaid judgment of this Court before the Supreme Court. 6. Be that as it may, since the Full Bench of this Court has already decided the issue, we are not inclined to take a different view. 7. We, accordingly, d...

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

|**SL.** **No**|**Date**|**Office Notes,** **reports, orders** **or proceedings** **or directions** **and Registrar’s** **order with** **Signatures**||**COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS**| |---|---|---|---|---| ||**2 5 .0 7 .2 0 2 3**|||ITA No. 09 of 2023 **Hon’ble Vipin San gh i, C.J.** **Hon’ble Rak esh Th apliy al, J.** 1. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. Mr. Chetan Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The present Income Tax Appeal is directed against the order dated 29.11.2021, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Dehradun Bench, Dehradun in ITA No. 895/ Del/ 2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 and CO No. 232/ Del/ 2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12. The Tribunal has answered the issue relating to the unpaid service tax liability, in favour of the Assessee by the impugned order. 4. The appellant does not dispute the position, that the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of the Full Bench of this court in I ncome Tax Appeal No. 40 of 2012, “**_Dir ect or of_** **_I n com e_** **_Tax_** **_I nt er n at ion al_** **_Tax at ion_** **_v ._** **_M/ s_** **_Sch lu m ber ger Asia Ser vices Lt d._**”, and connected matters, decided on 12.04.2019. 5. Mr. Bhatia submits that the department has already challenged the aforesaid judgment of this Court before the Supreme Court. 6. Be that as it may, since the Full Bench of this Court has already decided the issue, we are not inclined to take a different view. 7. We, accordingly, dismiss this appeal, following| |the|judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Income| |---|---| |Tax|Appeal No. 40 of 2012 dated 12.04.2019.| |8.|Since we have examined the appeal on merits,| |we|are not going into the issue of delay. Delay| |Condonation Application (IA No. 01/ 2023) stands|| |disposed of.|| |9.|Consequently, pending application(s), if any, also| |stand disposed of, accordingly.|| ||**( Rak esh Th apliy al, J.) ( Vipin San gh i, C.J.)**| ||**2 5 .0 7 .2 0 2 3** **25 .0 7 .2 0 2 3**| |Rahul||

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.