SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER BRANDS LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
ITA/95/2003 · 2026-01-19
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Jagmohan Bansal
body2003
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2003 DAILYLAW 1771 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2003 DAILYLAW 1771 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 201-1
ITA-95-2003 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.01.2026 SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER BRANDS LTD ...Appellant Vs.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
…Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL
Present:- Mr. Rohit Jain, Advocate(through V.C.) Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocate (through V.C.) and Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the assessee
Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel with
Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Counsel and
for Income Tax Department
*** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
1.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the issue involved herein is no more res integra and stands settled against the assessee vide
order dated 27.11.2025 passed by this Court in ITR-62 to 69-1995.
2.
Dismissed in terms of order dated 27.11.2025 passed by this Court in ITR-62-65 of 1995.
3.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
JUDGE
(AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL)
JUDGE January 19, 2026 Deepak DPA
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable
Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.01.19 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document