The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 11, Mumbai v. M/S.a.k. Films Private Limited
High Court
23 Jan 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 11, Mumbai v. M/S.a.k. Films Private Limited
Date of order
23 Jan 2013
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 11, Mumbai v. M/S.a.k. Films Private Limited, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: DATE : 23[rd] January 2013 P.C. : 1.In this appeal by the Revenue, following questions are proposed for our consideration. “a)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee company, being producer of T.V.
Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.
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 JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1499 OF 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 11, Mumbai..Appellant.
Versus
M/s.A.K. Films Private Limited..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar i/by Mr.D.K. Kamwal for the appellant.Mr.Ajay Singh for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 23[rd] January 2013
P.C. :
1.In this appeal by the Revenue, following questions are proposed
for our consideration.
“a)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee company, being producer of T.V. Serials, is an industrial undertaking with the meaning of Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?
b)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee company that uses its old plant and machinery is eligible for deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?”
2.
It is stated by the counsel for the parties that the issues raised in
the present appeal were raised in the assessee's own case being Income Tax
Appeal No.1636 of 2010 and this Court by order dated 19[th] April 2011 refused to entertain the appeal.
3.Accordingly, we see no reason to entertain the questions as proposed. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.
(M.S. Sanklecha, 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.
EaseValue