Itxa/1157/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-14,Mum v. Shri Jayantilal C. Ranka
High Court
14 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1157/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-14,Mum v. Shri Jayantilal C. Ranka
Date of order
14 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/1157/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-14,Mum v. Shri Jayantilal C. Ranka, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed in limini with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1156 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.Shri Mahavir C. Ranka
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
AND
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1157 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax..Appellant. V/s.Shri Jayantilal C. Ranka..Respondent.
ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1159 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.Shri Bakhtawar C. Ranka
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr. D.M.Kamwal for appellant.
Mr. A.K. Jasani for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 14TH AUGUST, 2009.
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue. The issue sought to be raised in the above appeals revolve around he appreciation of evidence. The Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that if the assessing officer wants to tax the value of the assets noted in the seized paper, he must necessarily allow the deduction for liabilities which are noted on the very same paper.
The Tribunal has held that the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case Dr. S.C. Gupta V/s. CIT [248 ITR 782 (All)] is distinguishable on the facts as in the present case, the assessee had discharged the burden. The Tribunal appears to have accepted the finding recorded by CIT. The view taken by the Tribunal appears to be reasonable and possible view. In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law is involved in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed in limini with no order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(V.C.DAGA, 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.