Ge Energy Parts Inc. v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal And Anr
[Citation -2014-LL-1121-94]

Citation 2014-LL-1121-94
Appellant Name Ge Energy Parts Inc.
Respondent Name Income-tax Appellate Tribunal And Anr.
Court HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 21/11/2014
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags reassessment proceedings • additional evidence • pending appeal
Bot Summary: The learned counsel for the respondents states that if the petitioner provides the information that they are seeking, then it will not be necessary to look into the LinkedIn profiles which were filed before the Appellate Tribunal as Volume-III in the pending appeal being Appeal No.671/Del/2011 and other connected appeals. The following information is sought by the respondents from the petitioner:- Names, designations, roles and responsibilities of the employees of G.E. Group Companies who were working in India during the relevant period along with their educational qualifications. Mr Ganesh, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that he is willing to provide the above information and that every effort W.P.(C) 4337/2014 Page 1 of 2 delhihighcourt. Asppn235834yr2014 would be made to do so provided the same is available with the petitioner. In view of the above statement made by the learned counsel for the parties, there is no need to look into the LinkedIn profiles which were allowed to be taken as additional evidence by the Tribunal by virtue of the impugned order dated 04.07.2014. In order to obviate any confusion in this regard, we set aside the order dated 04.07.2014 and also wash out any adverse comments made in the said order either against the petitioner or the revenue. In view of the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.


4/17/2020 delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=235834&yr=2014 IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 4337/2014 and CM Nos.8690/2014 GE ENERGY PARTS INC. Petitioner Through: Mr S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Ms Anuradha Dutt, Mr Rashi Dhir, Mr Sachit Jolly, Ms Shwetha Bidhuri, Mr Rahul Sateeja and Ms Gargi Bhatt, Advocates versus INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and ANR. Respondents Through: Mr Balbir Singh, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Abhishek Singh Baghel and Mr Angad Sandhu, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JAYANT NATH ORDER 21.11.2014 We have heard counsel for parties. learned counsel for respondents states that if petitioner provides information that they are seeking, then it will not be necessary to look into LinkedIn profiles which were filed before Appellate Tribunal as Volume-III in pending appeal being Appeal No.671/Del/2011 and other connected appeals. following information is sought by respondents from petitioner:- ?Names, designations, roles and responsibilities of employees of G.E. Group Companies who were working in India during relevant period along with their educational qualifications.? Mr Ganesh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner states that he is willing to provide above information and that every effort W.P.(C) 4337/2014 Page 1 of 2 delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=235834&yr=2014 1/3 4/17/2020 delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=235834&yr=2014 would be made to do so provided same is available with petitioner. He assures this Court that no information, as mentioned above, which is available with petitioner and G.E. Group shall be withheld. He also assures this Court that said information would be made available within six weeks. In view of above statement made by learned counsel for parties, there is no need to look into LinkedIn profiles which were allowed to be taken as additional evidence by Tribunal by virtue of impugned order dated 04.07.2014. In order to obviate any confusion in this regard, we set aside order dated 04.07.2014 and also wash out any adverse comments made in said order either against petitioner or revenue. It is also made clear that information that shall be supplied, as indicated above, shall not be used for purposes of considering validity of reassessment proceedings for assessment years 2001-02 to 2006-07. In view of aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of. However, in case of any difficulty parties are at liberty to approach this Court. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J JAYANT NATH, J NOVEMBER 21, 2014/dn W.P.(C) 4337/2014 Page 2 of 2 16 delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=235834&yr=2014 2/3 4/17/2020 delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=235834&yr=2014 delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=235834&yr=2014 3/3 Ge Energy Parts Inc. v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal And Anr
Report Error