Spirax Marshall Pvt.ltd v. Dy.commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
18 Jan 2005 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Spirax Marshall Pvt.ltd v. Dy.commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
18 Jan 2005
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Spirax Marshall Pvt.ltd v. Dy.commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2005) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Appeal is allowed accordingly, however with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.273 OF 2004
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.273 OF 2004
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.273 OF 2004
Spirax Marshall Pvt.Ltd. .. Appellant
V/s
Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax
Spl.Range-3, Pune - 411 034. .. Respondent
Mr.S.E.Dastur, Senior Counsel with Mr.A.K.Jasani for the
Appellant. for the Respondents.
Mr.R.V.Desai, Senior Counsel with Mr.P.Kapoor for the
Respondent.
CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN &J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 18.01.2005.
DATE : 18.01.2005.
DATE : 18.01.2005.
P.C.:
P.C.:
1. Appeal is admitted. The learned Senior Counsel for
Respondent waives service. By consent taken up for
final hearing. Heard the learned Counsel for the
parties. Perused order of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal dated 11.9.2003. Mr.Dastur, the learned Senior
Counsel for the Appellant has pointed out that the
Tribunal has not considered the method of accounting
that has been followed by the Appellant for the last
several years which was accepted by the Revenue. He
also brought to our notice that two important judgments
viz.CIT V/s Simplex Concrete Pipes - 179 ITR 8
CIT V/s Simplex Concrete Pipes - 179 ITR 8 and AnupEngineering Ltd.V/s.CIT-247 ITR 457, were not considered
Engineering Ltd.V/s.CIT-247 ITR 457,
by the Tribunal, though cited before it.
2. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we
quash and set aside the impugned order dated 11.9.2003
of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the matter is
remanded back to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Pune, to decide the same afresh on all issues, as
expeditiously as possible. Appeal is allowed
accordingly, however with no order as to costs.
(S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR,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.