Itta/647/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Ltd
High Court
29 Oct 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/647/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Ltd
Date of order
29 Oct 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itta/647/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Ltd, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Hence, we dismiss the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
I.T.T.A. NO.647 OF 2014
DATED:29.10.2014Between:Commissioner of Income Tax-IIIT Towers, A.C. GuardsHyderabad … AppellantAndM/s. Gulf Oil corporation LimitedP.B. No.1, Sanath Nagar (I.E.)Kukatpally P.O., Hyderabad … Respondent
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
We have heard Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, learned counsel for the appellant, andgone through the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal.
We are unable to admit the appeal on any ground as the learned Tribunal found thatthe preconditions for reopening of assessment under Section 148 of the Income TaxAct, 1961 are not satisfied. This fact finding has been arrived at by the Tribunal inparagraphs 9.5 and 9.6 of the impugned judgment.
Hence, we dismiss the appeal. There will be no order as to costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
________________________
SANJAY KUMAR, J29.10.2014
bnr
_______________________
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.