Case LawHigh Court › Ita/77/1999 Of The Commissioner Of Incom...

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.)
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