Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Gujarat Electricity Board
High Court
07 Feb 2005 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Gujarat Electricity Board
Date of order
07 Feb 2005
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Gujarat Electricity Board, the High Court (2005) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Gujarat Electricity Board260 ITR 84 (S.C.), hence the Appeal stands dismissed.
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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 813 OF 2000
The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Mumbai City VII, Mumbai .. Appellant
V/s.
M/s. B.D. Dhalla & Co., Mumbai .. Respondent
Mr. Pankaj Kapoor with Ms. S.V. Bharucha for the
Appellant
None present for the Respondent
CORAM : S. RADHAKRISHNAN &
CORAM : S. RADHAKRISHNAN &
CORAM : S. RADHAKRISHNAN &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 07.02.2005
DATED : 07.02.2005
DATED : 07.02.2005
P.C.:-
P.C.:-
P.C.:-
1. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant. Perused
the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated
2.12.1999. The learned counsel appearing for the
Appellant fairly states that the issue is squarely
covered by a judgment of the Supreme Court in
Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gujarat Electricity Board
Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gujarat Electricity Board260 ITR 84 (S.C.), hence the Appeal stands dismissed.
260 ITR 84 (S.C.)
(S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
(S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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.