In Date v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (1969) 75 Itr 33 (Bombay, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Hence, the appeal stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
srk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 416 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax ..AppellantVs.M/s Shiv Marine Industries Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent
..Respondent
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellant.
Mr. M. Subramanian a/w V.S. Hadade for the Respondent.
P.C.
CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &J.P. DEVADHAR ,JJ. 15[th] June,2009
DATE :
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for both the parties fairly state that the first question of law involved in the present appeal has already been considered and answered by the Division Bench of this court in the case of R.B. Jessaram Fetehchand (Sugar Dept.) Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1969) 75 ITR 33 (Bombay).
So far as second question is concerned the same is squarely covered by the Judgment of this Court in the case of Ship Breaking Traders Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 251 ITR 806 (Bombay).
In this view of the matter no substantial question of law is involved in the present appeal. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed.
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
(V.C.DAGA,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.