The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-35 v. M/S. Marico Industries Ltd. And Anr
High Court
16 Dec 2021 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-35 v. M/S. Marico Industries Ltd. And Anr
Date of order
16 Dec 2021
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-35 v. M/S. Marico Industries Ltd. And Anr, the High Court (2021) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2849 OF 2008
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-35
vs.
M/s. Marico Industries Ltd. and Anr.
...Petitioner
...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.745 OF 2009
Marico Ltd.
vs.
Director of Income Tax (INV.) Unit-VI and Ors.
...Petitioner
...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.1262 OF 2012WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.1257 OF 2012
WITHWRIT PETITION NO.1383 OF 2012WITHWRIT PETITION NO.1326 OF 2013WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2434 OF 2011WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2433 OF 2011WITHWRIT PETITION NO.946 OF 2012WITHWRIT PETITION NO.737 OF 2012
WITHWRIT PETITION NO.835 OF 2012
The Commissioner of Income Tax
vs.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and Ors.
...Petitioner
...Respondents
-----
Mr. P. C. Chhotaray for the Petitioner in WP Nos.2849/2008, 1262/2012,1257/2012, 1383/2012, 2434/2011, 2433/2011, 946/2012 and 737/2012and 835/2012.
Mr. Arvind Pinto for the Petitioner in WP No.1326/2013.
Mr. P. J. Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Atul K. Jasani and Mr. AshokBoghani i/b Mr. Ashok Boghani & Co. for the Petitioner in WP 745/2009and for Respondent No.1. in WP 2849/2008 and for Respondent No.2 inWP 835/2012.
Mr. K. Gopal a/w. Mr. Jitendra Singh and Mr. Om Kandalkar for RespondentNo.2 in WP 1262/2012, 1326/2013, 2434/2011 and 2433/2011.-----
CORAM : K. R. SHRIRAM AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 16 DECEMBER 2021.
P. C. :
WRIT PETITION NO.835 OF 2012
This petition is not part of the group and has wrongly been
tagged together.
2.
On 11/3/2021 the following order came to be passed:
"
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2.Mr. Jasani, learned counsel submits that respondents
have opted for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad se VishwasAct, 2020. Therefore, writ petition is required to be withdrawn.3.Since the petition has been filed by the revenue, Mr.Walve, learned standing counsel to obtain instructions regardingwithdrawal of the appeal.4.Stand over to 1st April, 2021."
3.On 1/4/2021 the petition was stood over to 21/4/2021.
Thereafter the matter got listed today.
4.Mr. Chhotaray states that he has no instructions. We haveconsidered the document filed by Mr. Jasani to substantiate his statementrecorded in the order dated 11/3/2021. In view thereof, Writ PetitionNo.835/2012 dismissed.
WRIT PETITION NOS.2849 OF 2008, 745 OF 2009, 1262 OF 2012, 1257OF 2012, 1383 OF 2012, 1326 OF 2013, 2434 OF 2011, 2433 OF 2011,946 OF 2012 AND 737 OF 2012
Remaining petitions be stood over to 13/1/2022.
(AMIT B. BORKAR, J)
(K. R. SHRIRAM, 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.