Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-Ii, Jaipur v. Order
High Court
21 Oct 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-Ii, Jaipur v. Order
Date of order
21 Oct 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-Ii, Jaipur v. Order, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.
Decision: In view of above, the appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D. B. Income Tax Appeal No. 287/2018
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-II, Jaipur.
----Appellant
Versus
M/s Rajasthan Durgs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Road No. 12, V.K.I.Area, Jaipur.----RespondentFor Appellant(s) : Mr. R.B. Mathur with Mr. Prateek Kedawat. For Respondent(s): Mr. N.L. Agarwal.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Order
21/10/2019
Learned counsel for the parties are at ad-idem that thequestions that are proposed in this appeal pertain to contributiontowards Provident Fund and ESI and the said issues have alreadybeen decided against the Revenue by this Court vide judgmentdated 06.01.2014 passed in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s.State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, (2014) 363 ITR 70 (Raj.).However, the Revenue has preferred SLP (C) No. 016249/2014against the aforesaid judgment before the Supreme Court.Learned counsel submit that although this Court has answered thequestion with respect to interpretation of Section 43-B of theIncome Tax Act against the Revenue but correctness of thatjudgment is to be tested by the Supreme Court in the aforesaidpending SLP. Therefore, this appeal may be disposed of making
the same subject to the final judgment of the Supreme Court onthe aforesaid question in pending SLP.
In view of above, the appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J(INDRAJIT MAHANTY),CJ
MANOJ NARWANI /5
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.