The Commissioner of Income-tax-5, Mumbai v. The Standard Batteries Ltd - 2014-LL-1008-38

Citation	2014-LL-1008-38
Appellant Name	The Commissioner of Income-tax-5, Mumbai
Respondent Name	The Standard Batteries Ltd
Court	HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	08/10/2014
Assessment Year	2006-07
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	substantial question of law • business expenditure • tax effect
Bot Summary:	CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI AND A.K. MENON, JJ. DATE : 8th October, 2014 P.C.: At the hearing of this appeal which challenges the appeal of Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench dated 28 th December, 2011 what we have noticed is that the assessment year in question is 2006 07. The Tribunal has only followed its order for earlier assessment year and in relation to the same assessee. The factual position for the said assessment year continued and that is why the Tribunal followed the order for the prior assessment year. In relation to such orders of the Tribunal, the revenue brought an appeal in this Court being Income tax Appeal No. 1797 of 2009 and prior thereto Income tax appeal No.2392 of 2007. Uploaded on - 31/10/2014 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2020 14:15:55 ::: SRK 2 ita-744-12.doc Though the tax effect was enormous, the revenue was advised to withdraw the appeal. It withdrew the appeal in subsequent assessment year also because there the tax effect was not found to be larger than the earlier assessment years. If there is substantial question of law and which was arising and therefore, could have been raised and the revenue withdrew the appeal No.2392 of 2007 filed under Section 260A of the Income tax Act, 1961, then the present appeal also does not raise any substantial question of law.

IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.744 OF 2012 Commissioner of Income tax 5, Mumbai ..Appellant Versus Standard Batteries Ltd. ..Respondent Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant. Ms. Aarti Sathe with Mr. Jitendra Singh for respondent. CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI AND A.K. MENON, JJ. DATE : 8th October, 2014 P.C.: At hearing of this appeal which challenges appeal of Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench dated 28 th December, 2011 what we have noticed is that assessment year in question is 2006 07. 2. Tribunal has only followed its order for earlier assessment year and in relation to same assessee. It has been referred by Tribunal in para 5 of impugned order extensively. issue or claim of business expenditure also arose in assessment year 2001 02 and for that assessment year, detailed order was passed by Tribunal on 16th October, 2006. factual position for said assessment year continued and that is why Tribunal followed order for prior assessment year. 3. In relation to such orders of Tribunal, revenue brought appeal in this Court being Income tax Appeal (Lodging) No. 1797 of 2009 and prior thereto Income tax appeal (Lodging) No.2392 of 2007. ::: Uploaded on - 31/10/2014 ::: Downloaded on - 29/06/2020 14:15:55 ::: SRK *2* ita-744-12.doc Though tax effect was enormous, revenue was advised to withdraw appeal. It withdrew appeal in subsequent assessment year also because there tax effect was not found to be larger than earlier assessment years. If there is substantial question of law and which was arising and therefore, could have been raised and revenue withdrew appeal No.2392 of 2007 filed under Section 260A of Income tax Act, 1961, then present appeal also does not raise any substantial question of law. It is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. (A.K. MENON, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 31/10/2014 Commissioner of Income-tax-5, Mumbai v. Standard Batteries Ltd

Metadata

Judgment