Itxa/1542/2012 Of Institute Ofmicronutrient Technology v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cir.-2, Pune, And Anr
High Court
27 Nov 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1542/2012 Of Institute Ofmicronutrient Technology v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cir.-2, Pune, And Anr
Date of order
27 Nov 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Itxa/1542/2012 Of Institute Ofmicronutrient Technology v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Cir.-2, Pune, And Anr, the High Court (2014) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of as not pressed and infructuous.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1542 OF 2012
Institute for Micronutrient Technology..Appellant
-Versus-Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCircle-2 & Anr.
..Respondents
...........
Mr. Atul K. Jasani for the Appellant.Mr. Tejveer Singh for the Respondents.
...........
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
AND A.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATE :- 27[th] NOVEMBER, 2014
P.C.:
This Appeal challenges the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 3[rd] April, 2012. When this Appeal was taken up for admission, Mr. Jasani has brought before us a copy of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune Bench, in Misc. Application No.67/PN/2012 arising out of the Income Tax Appeal No.648/PN/2010 on which the original order of 3[rd] April, 2012 was passed.
2]The ground in relation to which this Appeal is filed was raised as ground No.2 in the memo of Appeal. In relation to that, a mistake was pointed out to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has allowed the Misc. 1/2
wadhwa
Application of the Assessee and recalled its order to the extent of ground No.2. A copy of the order passed on Misc. Application dated 12[th] October, 2012 is taken on record and marked 店for identification.
3]In view of this order, Mr. Jasani has received instructions not to press this Appeal. The Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of as not pressed and infructuous.
(A. A. SAYED, J.)
(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
2/2
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.