Full Text
Translation output
$-29& 40 HIGH COURT OF DELHI ITA Nos.894/2018&jS^7/2018
THE COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-6 Appellant
Through Mr.Ruchir Bhatia,Advocate.
THE COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-6 Appellant
Through Mr.Ruchir Bhatia,Advocate.
VERSUS
MSBPHARMACEUTICALSPVT.LTD Respondent
Through Mr. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Advocate for Ms.Rashmi Chopra,Advocate.
Through Mr. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Advocate for Ms.Rashmi Chopra,Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
20.08.2018 We are not inclined to entertain the present appeal in view of the decision of the Delhi High Court in Pepsi Food Pvt. Ltd. Vs.
Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax & Am.(2015)376 ITR 87
(Delhi).
Even otherwise,the appeal appears to be misconceived.Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal had decided cross appeals preferred by the
Revenue and the assessee vide order dated 22"'' November, 2016, which order was challenged both by the Revenue and the respondent in ITA Nos.524/2017 and 532/2017, respectively. The High Court vide order dated 19 July,2017 had restored the matter to the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to decide the appeals afresh.
On the matter being remanded, the respondent-assessee had th filed an application for stay. The impugned order dated 6 March, 2018 grants stay. The impugned order is a first order and not an order
2018:DHC:8331-DB continuing the stay beyond 360 days.
The appeal is dismissed.
AUGUST 20,2018 NA SANJIVKHANNA,J.
CHANDERSHEKHAR,J.
2018:DHC:8331-DB
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
20.08.2018 We are not inclined to entertain the present appeal in view of the decision of the Delhi High Court in Pepsi Food Pvt. Ltd. Vs.
Assistant Commissioner ofIncome Tax & Am.(2015)376 ITR 87
(Delhi).
Even otherwise,the appeal appears to be misconceived.Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal had decided cross appeals preferred by the
Revenue and the assessee vide order dated 22"'' November, 2016, which order was challenged both by the Revenue and the respondent in ITA Nos.524/2017 and 532/2017, respectively. The High Court vide order dated 19 July,2017 had restored the matter to the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to decide the appeals afresh.
On the matter being remanded, the respondent-assessee had th filed an application for stay. The impugned order dated 6 March, 2018 grants stay. The impugned order is a first order and not an order
2018:DHC:8331-DB continuing the stay beyond 360 days.
The appeal is dismissed.
AUGUST 20,2018 NA SANJIVKHANNA,J.
CHANDERSHEKHAR,J.
2018:DHC:8331-DB
JUDGMENT