Clifford Chance v. The Deputy Commisioner Of
High Court
04 Jul 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Clifford Chance v. The Deputy Commisioner Of
Date of order
04 Jul 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Clifford Chance v. The Deputy Commisioner Of, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Issue: After hearing the parties in our opinion the question would arise and accordingly we vary the order dated 9th August, 2004 and add the question No.4 as under:- "On the facts & in the circumstances of the Appellant being a law firm providing legal advice and being remunerated on an hourly rate basis,...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O.O.C.J.
O.O.C.J.
NOTICE OF MOTIUON NO.2380 OF 2007
IN
TAX APPEAL (INCOME TAX) NO.182 OF 2002
Clifford Chance ..Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Commisioner of
Income Tax, Circle 2(6),Mumbai...Respondent
Mr. Harish Salvi i/b. S.K. Srivastava & Co., for the
Appellant.
Mr.Parag Vyas for Respondents.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO
R.V. MORE,JJ.
DATED : 4th July, 2007
P.C.
P.C.
. This Court by its order dated 9th August,2004 had
framed three questions as substantial questions of law. By
the present Motion the Appellants contend that another
question has to be framed as set out in para.5 of the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion. After hearing the parties in our opinion the question would arise and accordingly we vary the order dated 9th August, 2004 and add
the question No.4 as under:-
"On the facts & in the circumstances of the Appellant
being a law firm providing legal advice and being
remunerated on an hourly rate basis, whether the ITAT
erred in law in not ascertaining the income of the
Appellant in India on the basis of the services
rendered in India as measured by the billed hours of
work done in India?"
. Notice of Motion disposed of accordingly. Liberty to the parties to apply for early hearing after two months.
F.I. REBELLO, J)
(F.I. REBELLO
R.V. MORE, J)
(R.V. MORE, J)
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.