Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/1240/2012 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/1240/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 5 v. M/S. Gagan Trading Co.ltd

High Court 14 Nov 2014 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1240/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 5 v. M/S. Gagan Trading Co.ltd
Date of order
14 Nov 2014
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itxa/1240/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 5 v. M/S. Gagan Trading Co.ltd, the High Court (2014) decided the matter.

Decision: In such circumstances, we direct that all the pending matters on the point shall be listed on Board by the Registry.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1/2 itxa-1240-12.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1240 OF 2012 WITH (ITXA NO.1429/2010, ITXA NO.1434/2010, ITXA NO.3231/2010, ITXA NO.5570/2010, ITXA NO.29/2012, ITXA NO.30/2012, ITXA NO.707/2013 AND ITXA NO.1420/2014) … Commissioner of Income Tax-5v/s.Gagan Trading Co.Ltd. ...Appellant ...Respondent … Mr.Sureshkumar with Ms.Padma Divakar for the Appellant.Mrs.S.V.Bharucha for the Appellant in ITXA No.707/2013.Mr.Nishil Gandhi i/b Sameer Dalal for the Respondent. … P.C. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 14 NOVEMBER 2014 We have heard both sides in this group of Appeals. 2.The questions of law and which are stated to be arising from the orders of the Tribunal impugned in all these Appeals by the Revenue stand answered against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee by our order passed in Income Tax Appeal No.1213 of 2011 (Commissioner of Income Tax-12 v/s. Tip Top Typography) decided on 8 August 2014 together with other Appeals. itxa-1240-12.doc 3.In the light of the same, we dispose of all these Appeals in terms of our judgment. 4.The question of law is answered accordingly. 5. We have noted that several opportunities being given to the Assessees and the Revenue to furnish list of pending matters on the point has not resulted in both responding to the Registry. In such circumstances, we direct that all the pending matters on the point shall be listed on Board by the Registry. In the absence of any distinguishing features being pointed out, each one of them would then stand disposed of in terms of our judgment. Any matter, which has been remitted back by the Supreme Court, by the prior order, also will not survive in the light of the pronouncement by us. We have given enough opportunities to parties to address us. In such circumstances, it is futile now to list individual cases and day after day and waste our precious judicial time. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,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