Ita/77/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Madhukant C. Shah
High Court
12 Mar 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Ita/77/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Madhukant C. Shah
Date of order
12 Mar 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Ita/77/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Madhukant C. Shah, the High Court (2007) 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
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.77 OF 1999
The Commissioner of Income-tax-XI .. Petitioner.
V/s.
Shri Madhukant C. Shah .. Respondent.
Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the petitioner.
CORAM : DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 12TH MARCH, 2007.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Though the appearance is shown, none appears for the
respondent.
2. The above application was admitted on 23/06/1999
on the following question of law :
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case and in view of the recent various High
Court decisions, the Tribunal was right in law
in allowing 40% of incentive bonus / commission
as deduction ?
3. The issue sought to be raised in this
application is squarely covered by the judgment of this
Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.
Gopal Krishna Suri (248 ITR 819) in favour of the
revenue against the assessee.
4. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, statement of case is called for. The Tribunal
is directed to send statement of case as expeditiously
as possible.
5. 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.