Itxa/2444/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii, Pune v. Ptc Software (I) Pvt. Ltd,Pune
High Court
12 Apr 2016 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/2444/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii, Pune v. Ptc Software (I) Pvt. Ltd,Pune
Date of order
12 Apr 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Itxa/2444/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii, Pune v. Ptc Software (I) Pvt. Ltd,Pune, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 3.In the above view, the Appeal is dismissed as 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.2444 OF 2013
The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Pune
..Appellant
VersusPTC Software (I)Pvt. Ltd...Respondent
...........
Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms.Samiksha Kanani i/b. Vipul Bajpayee for the Appellant.
Mr. P. J. Pardiwalla, Senior Counsel, a/w Atul Jasani for the Respondent............
CORAM: M. S. SANKLECHA & A. K. MENON, JJ.
DATE : 12TH APRIL, 2016
P.C.:
1.This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 8[th] March, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the 'Tribunal'). By the impugned order the Respondent-Assessee's application for stay pending the disposal of its Appeal before the Tribunal was allowed.
2.Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 8[th] March, 2013 passed on the stay application Revenue is in appeal before us. Mr. Suresh
Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue states that appeal before the Tribunal in which this impugned order was passed has itself now been disposed of on 30[th] April, 2013 finally. Therefore this appeal has become infructuous.
3.In the above view, the Appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
(A. K. MENON, J.)
(M. S. SANKLECHA, J.)
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.