Case LawHigh Court › Admit On The Following Substantial Quest...

Admit On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law v. Ito (2009) 318 Itr (At) 87 (Mumbai) (Sb

High Court 29 Jun 2010 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Admit On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law v. Ito (2009) 318 Itr (At) 87 (Mumbai) (Sb
Date of order
29 Jun 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Admit On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law v. Ito (2009) 318 Itr (At) 87 (Mumbai) (Sb, the High Court (2010) decided the matter.

Issue: 1.Admit on the following substantial questions of law : “a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law to hold that the deduction u/s.80HHC to be recomputed by the assessing officer in accordance with the view taken by the special Bench in the case of...

Decision: The appeals are accordingly disposed of.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3361 OF 2010WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3362 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax-15 ..Appellant. Vs.M/s.Shrinathaji Yamunaji Enterprise..Respondent. .... Mr. A.S.Shivsharan for the Appellant.Mr.Anil Mishra i/b PKP Legal Solutions for the Respondent. .....CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. P.C. : 29 June 2010. 1.Admit on the following substantial questions of law : “a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law to hold that the deduction u/s.80HHC to be recomputed by the assessing officer in accordance with the view taken by the special Bench in the case of M/s.Topman Exports v. ITO (2009) 318 ITR (AT) 87 (Mumbai) (SB); b) On the facts and the circumstances of the case whether the ITAT was correct in law to direct the Assessing Officer to examine the nexus between interest income and expenditure in accordance with the view taken by the special Bench in the case of Lalsons Enterprises v. Dy CIT (2004) 89 ITD 25 (Del) (SB); Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue and counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee are agreed in stating that the first question shall be governed by the judgment of the Court delivered today in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals (ITA(L) 2887 of 2009). In view of the statement made, the first question shall stand covered by the judgment of this Court in Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals (supra). On remand, the Assessing Officer shall pass fresh orders in view of the judgment delivered by this Court. Insofar as the second question is concerned, learned counsel are agreed in stating that it would be covered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by the judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax V. Asian Star Co. Ltd. (ITA 200 of 2009 decided on 18 March 2010). The question of law shall accordingly stand answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The appeals are accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (Dr. D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan