Itxa/1152/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17 Mumbai v. Synergy Fashions
High Court
06 Jun 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1152/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17 Mumbai v. Synergy Fashions
Date of order
06 Jun 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itxa/1152/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17 Mumbai v. Synergy Fashions, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Decision: The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1152 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-17
..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. Synergy Fashions
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant.
None for respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND MRS. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA JJ.DATED : 6TH JUNE, 2011
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None for the respondent, though served. Perusal of the order passed by the ITAT shows that the Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the assessing officer and while remanding the matter, directed that the fresh order be passed in the light of the order Special Bench of the Tribunal in Lalsons Enterprises 89 ITD 25 (Mum)(SB) and the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Shriram Honda Power Equipment & Ors. [289 ITR 475 (Del)].
2.Since the Tribunal has remanded the matter back to the file of the assessing officer, we are not inclined to entertain the appeal. However, the decision of the Special Bench in Lalsons Enterprises 89 ITD 25 (Mum)(SB) and the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Shriram Honda Power Equipment & Ors. have been disapproved by this Court in the case of CIT V/s.Asian Star Co. Ltd. reported in [2010] 326 I.T.R. 56 (Bom). Therefore, we direct the assessing officer that while passing fresh order, he shall take into consideration the aforesaid decision of this Court. The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
(MRS. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, 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.