Ita/341/2002 Of M/S. Varma Mukherji Priva Te Ltd v. The Comm. Of Income Tax M Umbai City - Vi, Mumbai
High Court
12 Mar 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Ita/341/2002 Of M/S. Varma Mukherji Priva Te Ltd v. The Comm. Of Income Tax M Umbai City - Vi, Mumbai
Date of order
12 Mar 2007
Assessment year(s)
1986-87
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Ita/341/2002 Of M/S. Varma Mukherji Priva Te Ltd v. The Comm. Of Income Tax M Umbai City - Vi, Mumbai, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.341 OF 2002
M/s.Varma Mukherji Pvt. Ltd. .. Petitioner.
V/s.
The Commissioner of Income-tax
Mumbai City - VI, Mumbai .. Respondent.
Mr.Jitendra Jain i/by DSK Legal for the petitioner.
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the respondent.
CORAM : DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 12TH MARCH, 2007.
P.C. :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The
learned counsel for the respondents waive service. By
consent taken up for final hearing.
3. In the above application, following substantial
question of law is sought to be raised.
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, and in law, the Tribunal erred in
holding that the assessee Company was not
entitled to the deduction under the provisions
of Section 32A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?
4. The above matter pertains to AY 1986-87. In
this case, the Tribunal had followed the judgment of
2
this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Fashion Prints Ltd.
(217 ITR 456). The Tribunal in another matter in Dy.
C.I.T. V/s. New Reshma Dyeing appears to have
distinguished the High Court judgment and held that the
benefit of Section 32A was available to the assessee by
its order dated 9th April, 2002. In view of the above
conflicting decisions, statement of case be called for.
5. The Tribunal is directed to send the statement
of case as expeditiously as possible.
6. The application stands disposed of.
(DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)
(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.