Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mrs. Gita A. Mirchandani
High Court
13 Jan 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mrs. Gita A. Mirchandani
Date of order
13 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Mrs. Gita A. Mirchandani, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
(-1-)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.589 OF 2005
Commissioner of Income Tax....Appellant
Vs.
Mrs. Gita A. Mirchandani ....Respondent
Mr. P.S. Sahadevan with Ms.Anamica Malhotra, for
the Appellant.
Mr. S.S. Shetty for the Respondent.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&R.S.MOHITE, JJ.DATED: 13th January, 2009
CORAM: F.I.
R.S.MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: 13th January, 2009
P.C.:
P.C.:
. In so far as Questions (A) and (B) are
concerned, the same would not amount to substantial
question of law as the issue is based on facts.
Both the C.I.T. (Appeals) and I.T.A.T. have held
in favour of the assessee-respondent. Consequently
the said Questions would not arise.
2. In so far as Question (C) is concerned, the
same has been remanded back to the A.O. Even
otherwise the issue would be covered by the order of
this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax vs.
Commissioner of Income-tax vs.
J.K.Investors(Bombay) Ltd., 248 ITR 224.
J.K.Investors(Bombay) Ltd., 248 ITR 224.
Considering the above, Appeal dismissed.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, 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.