TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 724X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SLP would not by itself make the decision in Hindustan Unilever Ltd., (supra) not binding. Needless to state that in case the Revenue is aggrieved by this order, it is always open to challenge the same before the Apex Court and tag it along with the pending SLP in case of Hindustan Unilever Ltd. - Decided against the revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 841 of 2011 with Income Tax Appeal No. 842 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicable for A. Y. 1997-98 to 1999-2000 or the same has to be dealt with in accordance with the said provisions as applicable to A. Y. 2003-04 and 2004-05? 3. Both these Appeals by the Assessee were kept today for final disposal along with other Appeals filed by the Revenue on the same issue. This by our order dated 2nd August, 2018. 4. Mr. Dalal, learned Counsel for the Appellant in su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el for the Revenue submits that the issue should be referred to the Larger Bench, as an Appeal on an identical question has been admitted by this Court in CIT v/s. M/s. Milton's Pvt. Ltd., (Income Tax Appeal No. 2301 of 2013) on 20th February, 2017 and CIT v/s. M/s. Confidence Petroleum India Ltd., (Income Tax Appeal No. 582 of 2014) on 3rd April, 2017 . Thus, the aforesaid admission, accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... larger bench, can arise. We note that in the decision rendered in M/s. Hindustan Unilever Ltd., (supra), the Revenue was not able to point out any reason as to why the decision of the Gujarat High Court is General Motors (I) Ltd.,(supra) should not be followed. Even before us today, no submissions are made in support of the Revenue's contention that the decision in Hindustan Unilever Ltd., (su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
