Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 v. Adani Wilmar Ltd
High Court
18 Dec 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 v. Adani Wilmar Ltd
Date of order
18 Dec 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 v. Adani Wilmar Ltd, the High Court (2020) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: (A)Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law andon facts in restricting the addition of Rs.7,72,41,277/- toRs.2,64,500/- made on account of disallowance u/s.
Decision: 247 of2020 by this Court dated 01.10.2020 in the matter of very sameassessee, this appeal is dismissed, as the questions as proposedare no longer res-intigra.2020 by this Court dated 01.10.2020 in the matter of very sameassessee, this appeal is dismissed, as the questions as proposedare no longer re...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADR/TAX APPEAL NO. 355 of 2020
==========================================================
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 VersusADANI WILMAR LTD.
==========================================================
Appearance:MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALAand
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 18/12/2020
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA)
1. This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax, 1961, atthe instance of the Revenue and is directed against the orderpassed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AhmedabadBench, (D), dated 04.03.2020 in ITA No. 1947/Ahd/2017 for A.Yr.:2013-14. the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the orderpassed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AhmedabadBench, (D), dated 04.03.2020 in ITA No. 1947/Ahd/2017 for A.Yr.:2013-14.
2. The Revenue has proposed following two questions of law for theconsideration of this Court.consideration of this Court.
(A)Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law andon facts in restricting the addition of Rs.7,72,41,277/- toRs.2,64,500/- made on account of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.Rule 8D of the Act?
(B)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in holdingthat dis-allowance made u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D cannot exceed
C/TAXAP/355/2020 ORDER
exempt income?
3. We have heard Ms. Mauna Bhatt, the learned Senior StandingCounsel for the Revenue and Mr. Bandish Soparkar, the learnedcounsel appearing for the respondent – assessee on caveat.Counsel for the Revenue and Mr. Bandish Soparkar, the learnedcounsel appearing for the respondent – assessee on caveat.
4. Having regard to the order passed in the Tax Appeal No. 247 of2020 by this Court dated 01.10.2020 in the matter of very sameassessee, this appeal is dismissed, as the questions as proposedare no longer res-intigra.2020 by this Court dated 01.10.2020 in the matter of very sameassessee, this appeal is dismissed, as the questions as proposedare no longer res-intigra.
(J. B. PARDIWALA, J)
A. B. VAGHELA/suchit
(ILESH J. VORA,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.
EaseValue