Itl/1/2007 Of Govardhan Tikamchand Agrawal v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
16 Oct 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
Itl/1/2007 Of Govardhan Tikamchand Agrawal v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
16 Oct 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itl/1/2007 Of Govardhan Tikamchand Agrawal v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
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 BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Income Tax Appeal No.1/2007
[Govardhan Tikamchand Agrawal, Nagpur .vrs. The Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax, Nagpur]
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Office Notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders
...................................................................................................................................................................
Mr. S.N. Bhattad, Advocate for the appellant,
Mr. Anand Parchure, Advocate for the respondent.
..........
CORAM :K.J. ROHEE AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJDATED :OCTOBER 16, 2008
1.Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax as well asIncomeTaxAppellateTribunalfoundthattheappellant/assessee did not have sufficient cash balance in hisbooks of account to explain the cash of Rs.2,32,200/- found inhis possession on the date of search i.e. on 14.2.2003.Thesefindings are based on the report of Assessing Officer as well asthe corroborative evidence produced by the assessee.Thus, inour view, no substantial question of law arises in the presentappeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed.
JUDGE
JUDGE
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.