Case LawHigh Court › Income Tax Reference v. M/S. K. A. Malle...

Income Tax Reference v. M/S. K. A. Malle Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd

High Court 10 Aug 2005 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Income Tax Reference v. M/S. K. A. Malle Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
10 Aug 2005
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Income Tax Reference v. M/S. K. A. Malle Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2005) decided the matter.

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 JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICGTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO. 76 of 1995 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Applicant. vs. M/s. K. A. Malle Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd. ..... Respondent Mr. Parag Vyas for Applicant. Ms. Asifa Khan for Respondent CORAM: V. C. DAGAAND A. S. AGUIAR JJ. Date: 10[th] August, 2005. P. C. : 1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for opinion at theinstance of the Revenue: (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in setting aside the issueregarding the allowance of investment allowance otheleased plant and machinery on the ground that thecontroversy was covered in favour of the assessee andagainst the department by the Special Bench decision 2 of the Tribunal in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. First Leasing Co., of India Ltd., (1985) accepted the saiddecision?” 2. Both counsel appearing for the rival parties agree that the above question has been covered by decision in the case ofCommissioner of Income Tax vs. 1. Shaan Finance (P) Ltd., 2.First Leasing Co., of India Ltd., reported in [1998] 231 ITR 308.Needless to mention that while setting aside the finding recorded bythe CIT (Appeal), the Tribunal has relied upon its own Special Benchjudgment in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. First Leasing Co., ofIndia Ltd., (1985). The said judgment appears to have beenaffirmed by the Apex Court in the case cited supra. In this view ofthe matter the question referred to us is answered in the affirmativei.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Referenceaccordingly disposed of with no order as to costs. (V. C. DAGA J. ) -x- (A. S. AGUIAR J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan