Case LawHigh Court › The Director Of Income Tax(International...

The Director Of Income Tax(International Taxation v. M/S. Morgan Guarantee Internationalfinance Corporation )........ Respondant

High Court 16 Jul 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Director Of Income Tax(International Taxation v. M/S. Morgan Guarantee Internationalfinance Corporation )........ Respondant
Date of order
16 Jul 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Director Of Income Tax(International Taxation v. M/S. Morgan Guarantee Internationalfinance Corporation )........ Respondant, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Hence appeal is dismissed.

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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3533 OF 2007 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1796 OF 2007 The Director of Income tax(international Taxation) .... Appellant versus M/s. Morgan Guarantee InternationalFinance Corporation )........ Respondant. Mr. P.A. Vyas for the AppellantMr. A.K. Jasani for the Respondents. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J., & A.P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED: 16TH JULY 2008. P.C.: 1.This is an application for condonation of delay. Theother side has no objection. Consequently the Notice of Motion ismade absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Delay is condoned. 2.With the consent of parties, the appeal is taken up forfinal hearing. 3.We have heard the learned counsel appearing for theparties. The only question i.e. sought to be raised in the presentappeal, while challenging the order of Income Tax AppellateTribunal dated 13[th] September 2006 is that the interest under section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act are not liable to payby the assessee because they are not liable to pay advance taxinterest. 4.We have perused the judgment of the Tribunal, whorelied upon two earlier judgments including that of the SpecialBench of the Tribunal in case of Sedco Forex International Vs.DCIT reported in 72 ITD 415 and in case of Motorola Inc. 95ITD 269(SB)(Del). The view taken by the Tribunal in case ofSedco Forex International was also affirmed by the Bench of HighCourt in 264 ITR page 320. No question of law, much lesssubstantial question of law arises in the present case. We see noreason to take a different view. Hence appeal is dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE A.P. DESHPANDE, J.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan