The Commissioner of Income-tax-2 v. Tata Petrodyne Ltd - 2015-LL-0408-70

Citation	2015-LL-0408-70
Appellant Name	The Commissioner of Income-tax-2
Respondent Name	Tata Petrodyne Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	08/04/2015
Assessment Year	2005-06
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	substantial question of law
Bot Summary:	P.C. These two Income Tax Appeals challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench at Mumbai, for distinct assessment years involve identical questions. The Tribunal s order dated 11/23 January, 2013 is challenged and the assessment years are 2005 06 and 2007 08. 2 The questions of law are proposed at page 3 and 4 of the paper book but Mr. Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel, appearing for the Revenue in support of this Appeal fairly concedes that these very questions 1/2 Uploaded on - 15/04/2015 Downloaded on - 09/04/2020 12:22:21 2 10,11.itxa1469. 13.doc were dealt with by this Court and in the case of the same assessee. The order passed on 20th November, 2014 by a Division Bench of this Court to which one of us was a party in Income Tax Appeal No.1322/2012 is relied upon. 3 Upon perusal of this order and the questions proposed, we are of the view that the controversy is squarely covered by this Division Bench order. 4 Once the parties concede this position these Appeals do not raise any substantial questions of law.

IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1469 OF 2013 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1471 OF 2013 Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Appellant Versus M/s. Tata Petrodyne Ltd. Respondent Mr. Suresh Kumar for Appellant. Mr. Mandar Vaidya a/w Srihari M. Iyer for Respondent. CORAM S. C. DHARMADHIKARI AND A. K. MENON, JJ. DATE : 8th APRIL, 2015. P.C. These two Income Tax Appeals challenging order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench at Mumbai, for distinct assessment years involve identical questions. Tribunal s order dated 11/23 January, 2013 is challenged and assessment years are 2005 06 and 2007 08. 2] questions of law are proposed at page 3 and 4 of paper book but Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel, appearing for Revenue in support of this Appeal fairly concedes that these very questions 1/2 Uploaded on - 15/04/2015 Downloaded on - 09/04/2020 12:22:21 2 10,11.itxa1469.13.doc were dealt with by this Court and in case of same assessee. order passed on 20th November, 2014 by Division Bench of this Court to which one of us was party (Shri S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.) in Income Tax Appeal No.1322/2012 is relied upon. copy of said order is provided to us. 3] Upon perusal of this order and questions proposed, we are of view that controversy is squarely covered by this Division Bench order. 4] Once parties concede this position, then, these Appeals do not raise any substantial questions of law. Accordingly, Appeals are dismissed. No costs. (A. K. MENON, J.) (S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) wadhwa 2/2 Uploaded on - 15/04/2015 Downloaded on - 09/04/2020 12:22:21 Commissioner of Income-tax-2 v. Tata Petrodyne Ltd

Metadata

Judgment