Case LawHigh Court › Ita/116/1999 Of The Comm. Of Income Tax...

Ita/116/1999 Of The Comm. Of Income Tax v. Bank Of America Nt And Sa

High Court 06 Mar 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Ita/116/1999 Of The Comm. Of Income Tax v. Bank Of America Nt And Sa
Date of order
06 Mar 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/116/1999 Of The Comm. Of Income Tax v. Bank Of America Nt And Sa, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.

Issue: The above applications were admitted on the following question of law:- " Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law upholding the order of the CIT (A) deleting the addition on account of rediscounting charges holding that at the - = : 2 : = - time of redisc...

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.115 OF 1999WITHINCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.116 OF 1999WITHINCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.117 OF 1999WITHINCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.118 OF 1999WITHINCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.119 OF 1999WITHINCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.120 OF 1999 ORDINARY INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.115 OF 1999 WITH INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.116 OF 1999 WITH INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.117 OF 1999 WITH INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.118 OF 1999 WITH INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.119 OF 1999 WITH INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.120 OF 1999 The Commissioner of Income tax ..Petitioner. V/s. Bank of America NT & SA ..Respondent. Mr.P.S.Sahadevan with A. Kotangale for petitioner in all the applications. Mr.Percy Pardiwala i/b. M/s.Matubhai Janietram for respondent in all the applications. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 6TH MARCH, 2007. DATED : 6TH MARCH, 2007. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) ORAL JUDGMENT (PER DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. The above applications were admitted on the following question of law:- " Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law upholding the order of the CIT (A) deleting the addition on account of rediscounting charges holding that at the - = : 2 : = - time of rediscounting the bills there was an over riding titles of IDBI ? " 2. The above applications pertain to the assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79, 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84 respectively. 3. Both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent state that the issue involved in the above applications is squarely covered by the Judgment of our Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-taxV/s. Bank of Maharashtra reported in 264 I.T.R. 568 in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 4. In view thereof, Rule stands discharged. 5. All the applications are disposed of. (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) - = : 3 : = -
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