In Ita/5022/2010 Of Sri Mohan M Meharwade v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2012) allowed 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.
||iAJ<br>‘trniW<br>‘11|credit<br>‘n<br>nIt<br>210<br>‘003||interest|above<br>Network<br>Other<br>interest|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||‘nhe<br>‘003<br>OIALNCOMF<br>4<br>iAJ<br>cnnth<br>Lfl(Ii|||interest|Network<br>Other<br>interest|
||cnnth<br>23<br>Lfl(Ii|heSB<br>11<br>‘003<br>OIALNCOMF<br>4||hicome|Sources<br>hicome|
||cnnth<br>3<br>Lfl(Ii|SB<br>11<br>OIALNCOMF<br>4||hicome|Sources<br>hicome|
||cnnthmcd<br>Lfl(Ii<br>4|TOTAL<br>SB4<br>OIALNCOMF<br>4||hicome<br>TOTAL|Sources<br>hicome|
||4c<br>OIALNCOMF<br>4<br>mcd||TOTAL|hicome<br>TOTAL|Sources<br>hicome|
||mcd<br>1md<br>Iii-|cas<br>OIALNCOMF<br>4|TOTAL|as<br>TOTAL|Sources|
||asus<br>s<br>OIALNCOMF<br>4<br>tim<br>md<br>Ic<br>Iii-fl%Sf||TOTAL<br>It’.|as<br>TOTAL<br>It’.|Rs<br>-<br>R.’.|
||‘rh<br>md<br>fl%Sf<br>Si(|us|It’.|It’.|Rs<br>R.’.|
||‘rh<br>r...sp’r<br>Si(shct|li.8l|16.11.890|16.11.890||
||‘rhi<br>r...sp’r<br>shct|1.0000<br>li.8l|16.11.890|16.11.890|65<br>2.00.000|
||Thc.<br>r...sp’r<br>shct|16.11.890<br>1.0000<br>li.8l||16.11.890|65000<br>2.00.000|
||Thc.<br>I|1.0000<br>30|16.11.890|16.11.890|000<br>2.00.000|
|||||||
|||||||
|||||||
**==> picture [159 x 365] intentionally omitted <==**
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