The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 v. M/S. Esskay International
High Court
25 Jan 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 v. M/S. Esskay International
Date of order
25 Jan 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax -12 v. M/S. Esskay International, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
SSM
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 913 OF 2010
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 914 OF 2010
WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 915 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax -12
.... Appellant
VERSUS
M/s. Esskay International
.... Respondent
Ms. Padma Divakar for the Appellant in all appeals).Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the Respondent (in all appeals).
CORAM:J. P. DEVDHAR and
MRIDULA BHATKAR J.J.DATED:JANUARY 25, 2011.
P.C.:
In all these Appeals, the Tribunal has restored the matter to
the file of the Assessing Officer for considering the face value of
DEPB as covered U/s. 28 (iiid) of Income Tax Act, 1961 in the light
of the Special Bench Judgment in the case of Topman Exports V/s.
ITO reported in 2009 318 ITR (AP) 87.
SSM
2.The Judgment of the Special Bench in the case of Topman
Exports V/s. ITO has been reversed by this Court in the case of
Commissioner of Income Tax-13 V/s. Kalpataru Colours and
Chemicals, reported in 2010 (192) Taxmann 435.
3.Since the matter is remanded by the Tribunal, we are not
inclined to entertain these Appeals. However, the assessing officer
while giving effect to the judgment of the Tribunal shall take into
consideration the decision of this Court in the case of Kalpataru Colours & Chemicals (supra) or any other judgment.
4.All the appeals are disposed off accordingly with no order as to costs.
(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J)
(J. P. DEVDHAR, 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.