Of First State Aia Pacific Subcontinent Fund v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
18 Jan 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Of First State Aia Pacific Subcontinent Fund v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
18 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Of First State Aia Pacific Subcontinent Fund v. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: In these circumstances and that the District Resolution Panel has resolved the matter to the satisfaction of the Petitioners, then, irrespective of whether the Revenue would challenge the orders in higher forums is no ground to keep the Petitions pending.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Shephali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1547 OF 2015
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1389 OF 2015
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1390 OF 2015
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1391 OF 2015
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1610 OF 2015
National Westminister Bank PLC As Depositary of First State Aia Pacific Subcontinent FundVersus
The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
(International Taxation)-3(3)(1) and Ors
…Petitioner
…Respondents
Ms. Apoorva Paranjape a/w Ms. Bijal Ajinkya and Ms. Aditi
Mukundan, i/b M/s. Khaitan & Co., for the Petitioner in all
Petitions.
Mr. Arvind Pinto, for Respondent No. 1 in WP/1547/15, WP/1389/15, WP1390/15 & WP/1610/15.
Mr. Charanjeet Chanderpal, a/w Mr. Milind Borkar, for the Respondent No. 1 in WP/1391/15.
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & G.S. PATEL, JJ.DATED:18th January 2016
PC:-
1.
During the pendency of these Petitions, the District
Resolution Panel has passed an order holding that the Petitioners
would not be affected by the Section, applicability of which has
been questioned.
2.
In these circumstances and that the District Resolution Panel
has resolved the matter to the satisfaction of the Petitioners, then,
irrespective of whether the Revenue would challenge the orders in
higher forums is no ground to keep the Petitions pending. Because
of the subsequent development the issue is completely academic
and rendered infructuous.
3.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, on
instructions, seeks leave to withdraw these Petitions with liberty to
raise all contentions at an appropriate stage and in an appropriate
proceedings. Leave granted. Writ Petitions are allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed and disposed of as such. There will be no order as to costs.
withdrawn with liberty as prayed and disposed of as such. There
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, 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.