The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 4, Mumbai v. M/S.skf Bearings India Limited
High Court
05 Feb 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 4, Mumbai v. M/S.skf Bearings India Limited
Date of order
05 Feb 2013
Assessment year(s)
2001-2002
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 4, Mumbai v. M/S.skf Bearings India Limited, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: DATE : 5[th] February 2013 P.C. : 1.In this appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2001-2002, following question of law has been proposed for our consideration. “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in law, in allowing exemption under Secti...
Decision: 3.The appeal is accordingly 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.772 OF 2012
The Commissioner of Income Tax – 4, Mumbai..Appellant.
Versus
M/s.SKF Bearings India Limited..Respondent.
Mr.Suresh Kumar i/by Ms.Padma Divakar for the appellant.Mr.Atul K Jasani with Mr.Sameer Chitnis i/by Chitnis & Co. for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 5[th] February 2013
P.C. :
1.In this appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2001-2002,
following question of law has been proposed for our consideration.
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in law, in allowing exemption under Section 54EC, on gains earned transfer of Long Term Capital Assets, though they are depreciable assets, relying on the decision of M/s.Ace Builders P Limited 76 ITD 389 which is not accepted by the Revenue ?
2.Counsel for the parties states that the issue raised in the present
appeal is covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the
decision of this Court in the case of Ace Builders P Limited reported in 281
ITR 210 (Bom). Therefore, we see no reason to entertain the proposed question of law.
3.The appeal is accordingly 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.