The Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 v. M/S.novartis Consumer Health India Private Ltd
High Court
18 Jan 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 v. M/S.novartis Consumer Health India Private Ltd
Date of order
18 Jan 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 v. M/S.novartis Consumer Health India Private Ltd, the High Court (2010) 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.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO. O. C. J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1814 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax-7.
...Appellant.
Vs.
M/s.Novartis Consumer Health India Private Ltd.
...Respondent.
....
Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant.Mr.B.D.Damodar i/b. M/s.Kanga & Co. for the Respondent.
..... J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND
January 18, 2010.
P.C. :
The appeal was admitted on the following substantial
question of law:
“ Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amendment relating to omission of second proviso to section 43B effected by the Finance Act, 2003 was retrospective in effect and thus the payment towards superannuation fund made before the due date for filing of return under Section 139(1) was allowable as a deduction?”
Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue states that
the aforesaid question is covered against the Revenue, by the
judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd.,
(2009) 319 ITR 306. In the circumstances, the question of law shall
stand answered against the Revenue, in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court noted above. The appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, 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.