The CIT, Mumbai City-VI, Mumbai v. M/s. Siemens Ltd., Mumbai
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 12 Jan 2012
- Bench
- A R JOSHI, P DEVADHAR
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the application is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Income Tax Act, 1961 ss. 143(1)(a), 256(2)
- Finance Act, 1990
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Since, the reference application has been rejected by the ITAT by relying upon the judgment of this Court, we see no reason to entertain the application. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (J. P. DEVADHAR,J.)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.134 OF 2000 The CIT, Mumbai City-VI, Mumbai. Vs. M/s. Siemens Ltd., Mumbai. ..Applicant. ..Respondent. .... Mr. Suresh Kumar, for the Applicant. Mr. Arun Siwach i/b. Amarchand & Mangaldas & S.A. Shroff & Co. for the Respondent. .... CORAM : J. P. DEVADHAR & A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 12th JANUARY, 2012. P.C.
By this application filed under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income Tax seeks an order directing the ITAT to forward the following question of law for the opinion of this Court. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Assessing Officer was not correct in making the adjustment of Rs.3,08,90,473/- u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act on account of the cash subsidy received 2
5.ITA.134-00 by the assessee, even though such an adjustment stands validated by the provisions of Sec.28(iiib) introduced by Finance Act, 1990 with effect from 1.4.1967?”
Perusal of the order of the ITAT shows that the Tribunal by relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Bank of America NT & SA Vs. DCIT reported in 200 ITR 739, has rejected the application on the ground that the issue was debatable and the same could not be rectified by invoking the provisions of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act.
Operative part
Since, the reference application has been rejected by the ITAT by relying upon the judgment of this Court, we see no reason to entertain the application. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. (A. R. JOSHI, J.)
(J. P. DEVADHAR,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the application is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Income Tax Act, 1961 — ss. 143(1)(a), 256(2); Finance Act, 1990.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 12 Jan 2012. The bench was A R JOSHI, P DEVADHAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.