In Heard. Perused Appeal v. Addl.commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
Decision: Appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 243 OF 2006
Siyaram Silk Mills Limited.
... Appellant.
Income Tax Officer. ... Respondent.
P.J.Pardiwala, senior counsel with Atul K. Jasani for the appellant.
Suresh Kumar for the respondent.
P.C. :
Heard. Perused appeal.
2.Learned counsel for both parties agree that the questions on which the appeal was admitted vide order dated 17[th] October, 2008 should be answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee for the reasons recorded in Full Bench judgment of this Court dated 16[th] October, 2009 delivered in ITXA No.1282/2007 in the case of Plastiblends India Limited v. Addl.Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.
3.In view of the above, all the questions are answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. Appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
(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.
EaseValue