In The Case Of Cit v. Gennon Dunkerrley & Co.reported In 114 Ctr 56 (Bom
High Court
28 Jan 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
In The Case Of Cit v. Gennon Dunkerrley & Co.reported In 114 Ctr 56 (Bom
Date of order
28 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
1988-89
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In In The Case Of Cit v. Gennon Dunkerrley & Co.reported In 114 Ctr 56 (Bom, the High Court (2008) 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.489 OF 2001The Commissioner of Income Tax...Appellant.Vs.K.M.A. Ltd...Respondent.Mr. P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant.None for the Respondent.CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ.DATED : 28TH JANUARY,2008.PC :
1. The questions of law are framed in Para-6 of the
appeal memo.
2. In so far as first question is concerned, thelearned Tribunal relied its own order in respect of theassessee for the assessment years 1979-80 to 1982-83 andalso CIT(A)’s order for the assessment year 1988-89.
Nothing is brought before us that the earlier orders in
respect of the assessee were challenged.
in the case of CIT Vs. Gennon Dunkerrley & Co.reported in 114 CTR 56 (Bom.)
4. In so far as third question is concerned the learnedtribunal held that there are similar facts. The
judgment. In view of the above facts, we have no reason
to take different view than the view taken by the ITAT.
5. For the aforesaid reasons, we find no fault in the
order passed by the ITAT and accordingly, the appeal isdismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, 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.
EaseValue