Itta/409/2015 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax [Tds] v. M/S Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt., Ltd
High Court
10 Dec 2015 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/409/2015 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax [Tds] v. M/S Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt., Ltd
Date of order
10 Dec 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/409/2015 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax [Tds] v. M/S Margadarshi Chit Fund 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
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHANANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANAMURTHY
I.T.T.A.No.409 of 2015
JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan)
Both Sri B.Narasimha Sarma, learned Senior StandingCounsel for Income Tax Department, and Sri VikaramPooserla, learned counsel for the respondent, would agreethat the question of law, which arises for consideration in thisappeal, also fell for consideration in I.T.T.A.No.228 of 2013which was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court by itsorder dated 10.07.2013; and S.L.P.No.9457 of 2014,preferred thereagainst, was dismissed by the Supreme Courtby its order dated 30.07.2014.
Following the judgment in I.T.T.A.No.228 of 2013 dated10.07.2013, and in terms thereof, this appal is alsodismissed. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shallalso stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________
RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J
Date:10.12.2015JSU
_____________________________
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHANANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANAMURTHY
JSU
I.T.T.A.No.409 of 2015
Date: 10.12.2015
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.
EaseValue