The Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Ltu v. M/S Idbi
High Court
28 Nov 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Ltu v. M/S Idbi
Date of order
28 Nov 2011
Assessment year(s)
1997-98
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Ltu v. M/S Idbi, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Decision: The appeal is accordingly disposed of 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
Ladda
1 irxa-6-10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTEREST TAX APPEAL No. 6 of 2010
The Commissioner of Income-tax(LTU)
... Appellant.
Versus
M/s IDBI
... Respondent.
Mr Suresh Kumar for the appellant.
Mr Ajit Shah with Shrihari Iyer for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & A.R. Joshi, JJ.DATE : 28[th] November,2011.
P.C. :-
1.Though the ITAT following its decision in the case of Union of Bank of India vs. Additional CIT reported in 108 TTJ 720, has held that interest tax is not leviable, Counsel for the parties state that in view of the Special Bench decision of the ITAT in the case of Gujarat Gas Financial Services Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-4, Ahmadabad reported in [ 2008] 115 ITD 218 (AHD) the matter needs to be considered afresh by the ITAT. In this view of the matter, by consent, the impugned order of the ITAT dated 8[th] August, 2008 in Interest Tax Appeal No. 37/Mum/01 relevant to the
Ladda
assessment year 1997-98 is quashed and set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ITAT for fresh consideration in accordance with law. The appeal is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs.
(A.R.Joshi,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.