{"id":5306,"date":"2007-08-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-08-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007"},"modified":"2018-06-25T10:12:33","modified_gmt":"2018-06-25T04:42:33","slug":"ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007","title":{"rendered":"M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B Reddy<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S.H. Kapadia, B. Sudershan Reddy<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  3765 of 2007\n\nPETITIONER:\nM\/s. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd\n\nRESPONDENT:\nCommissioner of Income Tax\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/08\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nS.H. Kapadia &amp; B. Sudershan Reddy\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T <\/p>\n<p>CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3765\t\tOF 2007<br \/>\n(Arising out of SLP(c) No.  3883 of 2007)<\/p>\n<p>B.SUDERSHAN REDDY,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\t\tThis appeal by Special Leave preferred by the<br \/>\nappellant-assessee is directed against the judgment of Delhi<br \/>\nHigh Court  dated  11.10.2006 in ITA No. 478 of 2005.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\t Briefly stated the facts are as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe appellant-assessee is engaged in the<br \/>\nmanufacture and sale of soft drinks.  The appellant-<br \/>\nassessee entered into an agreement with M\/s. Pradeep<br \/>\nOil Corporation for use of their premises for receipt,<br \/>\nstorage and dispatch of goods belonging to the<br \/>\nappellant-company.  There is no dispute that the<br \/>\nappellant had paid the warehousing charges to M\/s.<br \/>\nPradeep Oil Corporation on which tax was deducted<br \/>\nunder Section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for<br \/>\nshort &#8216;the Act&#8217;) @ 2%.  The Assessing Officer vide order<br \/>\ndated 30.3.2001 held the appellant  to be &#8216;assessee in<br \/>\ndefault&#8217; for failure to deduct tax at source in respect of<br \/>\nwarehousing charges paid to M\/s. Pradeep Oil<br \/>\nCorporation. The Assessing Officer rejected the plea of<br \/>\nthe assessee that the payments made by the appellant-<br \/>\ncompany were in the nature of contractual payments on<br \/>\nwhich tax was deducted under Section 194C of the Act<br \/>\nat 2%.  The Assessing Officer accordingly held that the<br \/>\nwarehousing charges were in the nature of rent as<br \/>\ndefined in Explanation to Section 194-I of the Act and,<br \/>\ntherefore, tax ought to have been deducted at 20%<br \/>\nunder the said provisions as against deduction of tax at<br \/>\n2% under Section 194C of the Act. The Assessing Officer<br \/>\nhaving held the appellant to be &#8216;assessee in default&#8217;  for<br \/>\nthe shortfall in the amount of tax deducted at source<br \/>\nlevied interest under Section 201 (1A) of the Act on the<br \/>\namount of tax alleged to be short deducted.  The<br \/>\nAssessing Officer accordingly determined the amount of<br \/>\nshort deduction of tax and also levied interest payable<br \/>\nthereon under Section 201 (1A) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThe appellant preferred an appeal against the order<br \/>\nof the Assessing Officer before the Commissioner of<br \/>\nIncome Tax (Appeals) and thereafter before the<br \/>\nTribunal.  The Tribunal also took the view that the<br \/>\nappellant-assessee to be an &#8216;assessee in default&#8217; in<br \/>\nrespect of the amount of short deduction of tax and also<br \/>\nupheld the levy of interest under Section 201 (1A) of the<br \/>\nAct. The further appeal preferred by the appellant-<br \/>\nassessee was dismissed by the High Court on<br \/>\n21.5.2004.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tThe appellant thereafter preferred miscellaneous<br \/>\napplication in the appeals that were already disposed of<br \/>\nseeking rectification of the order of the Tribunal dated<br \/>\n12.7.2002.  Be it noted, the appellant did not raise any<br \/>\ndispute about it being the &#8216;assessee in default&#8217; and also<br \/>\nraised no objection as regards the levy of interest under<br \/>\nSection 201 (1A) of the Act.  The grievance of the<br \/>\nappellant was that its alternative contention that the<br \/>\nwarehouser has been assessed on its income and the<br \/>\ntax due has been recovered from it by the department<br \/>\nand therefore, no further tax could have been collected<br \/>\nfrom the appellant has not been considered by the<br \/>\nTribunal in its order dated 12.7.2002.  The contention<br \/>\nwas that since the tax to be recovered by the<br \/>\ndepartment on the income has already been paid by the<br \/>\nassessee, no further tax should be recovered from the<br \/>\nappellant on the same income.  The Tribunal vide its<br \/>\norder dated 13.9.2004 allowed the application of the<br \/>\nappellant on the ground that the alternative contention<br \/>\nof the appellant has not been considered while disposing<br \/>\nof the appeal.  The contention was specifically raised in<br \/>\nGround No. 7 of the memorandum of appeal preferred<br \/>\nby the appellant. The Tribunal accordingly held, to that<br \/>\nextent, there is a mistake apparent on the face of record<br \/>\nand, therefore, constitutes a rectifiable mistake under<br \/>\nSection 254 (2) of the Act.  The Tribunal accordingly<br \/>\nrecalled its earlier order dated 12.7.2002 for the limited<br \/>\npurpose of taking up the particular ground raised in<br \/>\nGround No. 7 in the memorandum of appeal.  This order<br \/>\ndirecting the reopening of the matter has attained its<br \/>\nfinality.  The department did not challenge the said<br \/>\norder.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThe Tribunal upon rehearing the appeal held that<br \/>\nthough the appellant-assessee was rightly held to be an<br \/>\n&#8216;assessee in default&#8217;, there could be no recovery of the<br \/>\ntax alleged to be in default once again from the<br \/>\nappellant considering that Pradeep Oil Corporation had<br \/>\nalready paid taxes on the amount received from the<br \/>\nappellant.  It is required to note that the department<br \/>\nconceded before the Tribunal that the recovery could not<br \/>\nonce again be made from the  tax deductor where the<br \/>\npayee included the income on which tax was alleged to<br \/>\nhave been short deducted in its taxable income and paid<br \/>\ntaxes thereon.  There is no dispute whatsoever that<br \/>\nPradeep Oil Corporation had already paid the taxes due<br \/>\non its income received from the appellant and had<br \/>\nreceived refund from the tax department.  The Tribunal<br \/>\ncame to the right conclusion that the tax once again<br \/>\ncould not be recovered from the appellant (deductor-<br \/>\nassessee) since the tax has already been paid by the<br \/>\nrecipient of income.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tThe High Court interfered with the order passed by<br \/>\nthe Tribunal on the ground that the order dated<br \/>\n12.7.2002 of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal has<br \/>\nattained its finality since the appeal filed against the<br \/>\nsame by the appellant was dismissed by the High Court<br \/>\non 21.5.2004; the point based on Ground No. 7 was not<br \/>\ntaken up in the appeal preferred by the appellant in the<br \/>\nHigh Court.  The High Court further held that the<br \/>\nIncome-tax Appellate Tribunal&#8217;s order dated 12.7.2002<br \/>\ngot itself merged into the order passed by it on<br \/>\n21.5.2004 dismissing the appeal of the appellant herein.<br \/>\nThe High Court came to the conclusion that the Tribunal<br \/>\ncould not have reopened the matter for any further<br \/>\nhearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tWe have already noticed that the order passed by<br \/>\nthe Tribunal to reopen the matter for further hearing as<br \/>\nregards ground No. 7 has attained its finality.  In the<br \/>\ncircumstances, the High Court could not have interfered<br \/>\nwith the final order passed by the Income-tax Appellate<br \/>\nTribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tBe that as it may, the circular No. 275\/201\/95-<br \/>\nIT(B) dated 29.1.1997 issued by the Central Board of<br \/>\nDirect Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an<br \/>\nend to the controversy.  The circular declares &#8220;no<br \/>\ndemand visualized under Section 201 (1) of the Income-<br \/>\ntax Act should be enforced after the tax deductor has<br \/>\nsatisfied the officer-in-charge of TDS, that taxes due<br \/>\nhave been paid by the deductee-assessee.  However,<br \/>\nthis will not alter the liability to charge interest under<br \/>\nSection 201 (1A) of the Act till the date of payment of<br \/>\ntaxes by the deductee-assessee or the liability for<br \/>\npenalty under Section 271C of the Income-tax Act.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tIn the instant case, the appellant had paid the<br \/>\ninterest under Section 201 (1A) of the Act and there is<br \/>\nno dispute that the tax due had been paid by deductee-<br \/>\nassessee (M\/s Pradeep Oil Corporation).  It is not<br \/>\ndisputed before us that the circular is applicable to the<br \/>\nfacts situation on hand.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tIn the circumstances, it is not necessary to go in<br \/>\ndetail as to whether the Tribunal could have at all<br \/>\nreopened the appeal to rectify the error apparent on the<br \/>\nface of the record.  We do not wish to express any firm<br \/>\nview on this aspect.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\tThe impugned judgment of the High Court is<br \/>\naccordingly set aside.  The appeal is allowed with no<br \/>\norder as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007 Author: B Reddy Bench: S.H. Kapadia, B. Sudershan Reddy CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3765 of 2007 PETITIONER: M\/s. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd RESPONDENT: Commissioner of Income Tax DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/08\/2007 BENCH: S.H. Kapadia [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5306","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-08-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-25T04:42:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-25T04:42:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1253,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-25T04:42:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-08-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-25T04:42:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007","datePublished":"2007-08-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-25T04:42:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007"},"wordCount":1253,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007","name":"M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-08-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-25T04:42:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-hindustan-coca-cola-beverage-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-16-august-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 16 August, 2007"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5306","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5306"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5306\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5306"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5306"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5306"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}