2019 (11) TMI 604

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....el for the Respondent. ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per M.S. Sonak, J.) Heard Ms. Priyanka Kamat for the Appellant and Ms. Susan Linhares for the Respondent. 2. By our order dated 07/09/2009, this appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law : "1. Whether the ITAT erred in upholding the validity of the Assessment Order dated 28th February, 2005 passed by the Respondent u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ertaken to be placed on record. She points out that the impugned Judgment and Order made by the ITAT in the present case, entirely relies upon the decision of yet another Division Bench of this Court in Scoop Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. I.T.O. & Ors. 289 ITR 195 (Bom.). She further points out that by order dated 19/12/2008 in Income Tax Appeal No.1282/2007, another Division Bench of this Court notice....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dismissed for non-prosecution, we were quite reluctant to defer the hearing in this matter, any further. 6. Ms. Linhares, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent also stated that she is unaware as to whether the Full Bench has already disposed of the reference made to it. 7. In a matter of this nature which has been pending since 2009 and adjourned on several occasions, least that we exp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment and Order dated 16.10.2009 in Income Tax Appeal No.1282/2007, it is apparent that the Full Bench has held that there is really no conflict as such in the decisions of this Court in the cases of Grasim Industries Limited (supra) and Indian Rayon Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT 261 ITR 98 (Bom) which is in fact the decision followed in Scoop Industries Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The Full Bench has held that t....