Itxa/3204/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Cotton Corpn. Of India Ltd
High Court
16 Jul 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/3204/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Cotton Corpn. Of India Ltd
Date of order
16 Jul 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/3204/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Cotton Corpn. Of India Ltd, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed accordingly, with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.891 OF 2004
The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Appellant.
V/s.
M/s.Cotton Corporation of India Ltd. .. Respondent.
Mr.B.M. Chatterjee with Ms.P.P. Bhosale i/by Pankaj
Kapoor for the appellant.
Mr.K.B. Bhujle for the respondent.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 16TH JULY, 2007.
P.C. :
1. From the order dated 18-07-2003 passed by the
I.T.A.T., we find that the appeal was dismissed as
approval of C.O.D. for pursuing the appeal was not
taken pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court
in Oil and Natural Gas Commission. The Tribunal,
however, in the event Revenue obtains approval of the
C.O.D. in future to pursue the appeals has given
liberty to apply for recalling the order and request
for disposal of revenue’s appeals on merit.
2. On behalf of the respondent, learned counsel
points out that even for filing this appeal, revenue
has not obtained approval from the C.O.D.
2
3. In view of what is set out in para 3 of the
impugned order, we do not propose to interfere
considering that the Revenue has an opportunity to
approach the I.T.A.T.
4. The appeal is dismissed accordingly, with no
order as to costs.
(F.I. REBELLO, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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.