Income Tax Appeal v. M/S Keshi Builders
High Court
21 Feb 2006 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
Income Tax Appeal v. M/S Keshi Builders
Date of order
21 Feb 2006
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Income Tax Appeal v. M/S Keshi Builders, the High Court (2006) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Kandpal, J.) the and assessee and 1996- purchase did was for Appellate been I.T.A.T. reason what the by the the Tax of has of business was the the and be 9- Accordingly all the appeals are 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 Uttaranchal, at Nainital.
(1) Income Tax Appeal No. 43 of 2006 Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun ........ Appellant. Vs. M/S Keshi Builders, 75, Rajpur Road, Dehradun ........ Respondent (2) Income Tax Appeal No. 44 of 2006 Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun ...... Appellant Vs. M/S Keshi Builders, 75, Rajpur Road, Dehradun ....... Respondent. (3)Income Tax Appeal No. 45 of 2006Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun ........ Appellant. Vs. M/S Keshi Builders, 75, Rajpur Road, Dehradun ...... Respondent. (4)Income Tax Appeal No. 46 of 2006Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun ...... Appellant, Vs. M/S Keshi Builders, 75, Rajpur Road, Dehradun ....... Respondent (5)Income Tax Appeal No. 47 of 2006 Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun ...... Appellant, Vs. M/S Keshi Builders, 75, Rajpur Road, Dehradun ....... Respondent Sri P. Maulekhi,learned counsel for the applicant.Coram: Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J.
(Per: Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J.)
the
and
assessee
and
1996-
purchase
did
was
for
Appellate
been
I.T.A.T.
reason
what
the
by
the
the
Tax
of
has
of
business
was
the
the
and
be
9- Accordingly all the appeals are dismissed.
10- Nos. 44/2006 to 47/2006.
Let a copy of this order be placed in the each file of I.T.A.
(B.C. Kandpal, J.)
(P.C. Verma, J.)
ISB
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