The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai v. Uni Deritend Limited
High Court
25 Apr 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai v. Uni Deritend Limited
Date of order
25 Apr 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai v. Uni Deritend Limited, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.30 OF 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai
..Appellant.
Versus
Uni Deritend Limited..Respondent.
Mr.Vimal Gupta with Ms.Padma Divakar for the appellant.None for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & A.A. Sayed, JJ.
DATE : 25[th] April, 2011.
P.C. :
1.Heard. None for the respondents, though served. Affidavit of service is already filed on record.
2.In this case, the Tribunal has remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to follow the Special Bench decision in
the case of Topman Exports reported in 318 ITR 87 (AT). The Special Bench decision in the case of Topman Exports (supra) has been over-ruled by this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Kalpataru Colours &
Chemicals reported in 328 ITR 451.
3.In this view of the matter, instead of entertaining the appeal, we direct the Assessing Officer that while giving effect to the order of the Tribunal to take into consideration the judgment of this Court in the case of Kalpataru Colours & Chemicals (supra).
4.The appeal is accordingly disposed off. No costs.
(A.A. Sayed, 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.