The Commissioner Of Income Tax – V, Pune v. Maharashtra Scooters Limited, Pune
High Court
03 Apr 2013 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – V, Pune v. Maharashtra Scooters Limited, Pune
Date of order
03 Apr 2013
Assessment year(s)
2000-01, 1995-96
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – V, Pune v. Maharashtra Scooters Limited, Pune, the High Court (2013) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 3.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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.50 OF 2013
The Commissioner of Income Tax – V, Pune..Appellant.
Versus
Maharashtra Scooters Limited, Pune..Respondent.
Mr.Tejveer Singh for the appellant.Mr.Nitesh Joshi with Mr.Mitesh Naik i/by Dhru & Company for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 3[rd] April 2013
P.C. :
1.In this appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2000-01,
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 justified in upholding the CIT (A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of Rs.1,12,16,256/- being payment of productivity linked wages when the liability was uncertain and had not crystallized in the assessment year ?”
2.The Tribunal allowed the claim of the respondent – assessee by
following its decision for the assessment year 1995-96. The Revenue, being
aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal for assessment year 1995-96, filed an Appeal to this Court being Income Tax Appeal No.6929 of 2010 inter alia raising an identical question therein. This Court by its order dated 21[st ]February 2013 refused to entertain the appeal filed for assessment year 1995-96 by the Revenue being Income Tax Appeal No.6929 of 2010. Therefore, for the reasons stated in our order dated 21[st] February 2013 in Income Tax Appeal No.6929 of 2010, we see no reason to entertain the proposed question of law.
3.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.