The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Iii, Pune v. Serum Institute Of India Research Foundation, Pune
High Court
13 Mar 2013 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Iii, Pune v. Serum Institute Of India Research Foundation, Pune
Date of order
13 Mar 2013
Assessment year(s)
2005-06
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Iii, Pune v. Serum Institute Of India Research Foundation, Pune, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 4.Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.325 OF 2013
The Commissioner of Income Tax – III, Pune..Appellant.
Versus
Serum Institute of India Research Foundation, Pune..Respondent.
Mr.Tejveer Singh for the appellant.Mr.Mihir Naniwadekar for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 13[th] March 2013
P.C. :
Office objections waived.
2.In this appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2005-06, 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 setting aside the case to the file of assessing officer with a direction to examine that the amount received as corpus donation is in nature of gift when non-recognized assessee institution itself had treated it as corpus donation in its accounting treatment ?”
Since the Tribunal by the impugned order has restored the issue
to the file of the assessing officer for fresh consideration, we see no reason to
entertain the proposed question of law.
4.Accordingly, the appeal is 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.