In Itxa/4103/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -6 Mumbai v. Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In these circumstances, we see no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.4103 OF 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax-6
..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. GlaxoSmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant.Mr. Nikhil Dharod i/b. M & M Legal Venture for respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND R.M. SAVANT, JJ.DATED : 22ND NOVEMBER, 2010
P.C. :-
1.Heard. The ITAT by the impugned order has set aside the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) on the ground that the quantum addition has been deleted. Learned counsel for the revenue states that the appeal filed by the revenue against the quantum addition has been dismissed on 22/07/2009 on account of delay and that order has attained finality. Hence no fault can be found with the order passed by the ITAT in deleting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, especially when the quantum addition stands deleted. In these circumstances, we see no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(R.M. SAVANT, 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.