Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central)-3, Delhi v. M/S Radico Nv Distilleries Maharashtra Ltd
High Court
21 Aug 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central)-3, Delhi v. M/S Radico Nv Distilleries Maharashtra Ltd
Date of order
21 Aug 2019
Assessment year(s)
2009-10
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central)-3, Delhi v. M/S Radico Nv Distilleries Maharashtra Ltd, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.
Decision: The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~83
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 757/2019
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-3, DELHI
..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Ajit Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms.Adiba Mujahid and Ms.Priya Sarkar, Advocates.
versus
M/S RADICO NV DISTILLERIES MAHARASHTRA LTD.
..... Respondent Through: Mr.Gaurav Jain with Mr.Aniket D.Agrawal and Ms.Maneesha Sharma, Advocates.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH O R D E R
% 21.08.2019
1. The Revenue is in appeal against the order dated 17[th] December 2018 passed by the ITAT in ITA No.4360/Del/2015 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.
2. The Revenue is aggrieved only to the extent that after noting that during the pendency of the appeal before the ITAT, the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission (‘ITSC’) rejecting the Assessee’s settlement application had been set aside by this Court by an order dated 9[th] October 2017 in WP (C) 3373 of 2013, the ITAT instead of disposing of the appeals
as having become infructuous stated that it was allowing the appeals thereby setting aside the assessment orders as well as the orders of the CIT (A) in the matter.
3. The Court finds no reason to entertain the appeal as it is sufficient to clarify that the ITAT, having noted the subsequent developments which resulted in the Assessee’s settlement application being revived before the ITSC should have simply disposed of the orders as having become infructuous. It is clarified that the further proceedings would depend on the outcome of the proceedings before the ITSC. It is further clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions of the parties.
4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
S.MURALIDHAR, J
AUGUST 21, 2019 / tr
TALWANT SINGH, 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.