Itxa/1176/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - 11 v. Ajay Singh Deol
High Court
05 Nov 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1176/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - 11 v. Ajay Singh Deol
Date of order
05 Nov 2014
Assessment year(s)
2000-2001
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/1176/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - 11 v. Ajay Singh Deol, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The Appeal is devoid of merits, hence, dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
k
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1176 OF 2012
Commissioner of Income Tax-11...Appellant.V/s.Ajay Singh Deol...Respondent.
Mr. Charanjeet Chanderpal for the Appellant.Mr. Ravi Rattesar i/b Mr. D.M. Harish & Co. for the Respondent.
CORAM:S.C. DHARMADHIKARI ANDA.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATED :5 NOVEMBER, 2014.
P.C.:
1This Appeal by the Revenue challenges the order passed by the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench dated 29[th] February, 2012.
2The questions of law and termed as substantial are to be found at page 4 of the paper book.
3We have heard Mr. Chanderpal appearing for the Revenue and learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Assessee. Upon perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the Appeal of the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2000-2001 and upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 1[st] September,
katkam
k
2003, we have noted that the Assessee offered an explanation and provided details not only in relation to the membership of the club/association but also regarding the income which he derived from the Distributors and Producers of Films. The findings of fact accepting his explanation, therefore, do not raise any substantial question of law. The Appeal is devoid of merits, hence, dismissed.
(A.A. SAYED, J.)
(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, 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.