Case Law › High Court › Mait/51/2007 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Mait/51/2007 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Vindhya Telelinks Ltd

High Court 19 Nov 2018 In favour of: Revenue

Forum / Bench

High Court · mphc_db_jbp

Parties

Date of order

19 Nov 2018

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mait/51/2007 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Vindhya Telelinks Ltd, the High Court (2018) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn in view of the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 which isavailable on record leaving all questions open.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The High Court Of Madhya PradeshMAIT-51-2007 (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXVs VINDHYA TELELINKS LTD.) [19][-][11][-][2018]Jabalpur, Dated :Jabalpur, Dated : Shri Sushil Verma, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Sapan Usrethe, Advocate for the respondent. Heard on I.A. No.13898/2018, which is an applicationfor withdrawal of appeal filed on behalf of the Revenue inview of the circular of Government of India, Ministry ofFinance (Department of Revenue), Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (Judicial Cell) dated 11.07.2018 In view of the aforesaid, I.A. No.13898/2018 is allowedand closed. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn in view of the CBDT circular dated 11.07.2018 which isavailable on record leaving all questions open. (S.K. SETH)(VISHNU PRATAP SINGH CHAUHAN)CHIEF JUSTICEJUDGE @shish

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.