Itxa/1289/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8 ,Mumbai v. M/S Kec International Ltd
High Court
23 Sep 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1289/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8 ,Mumbai v. M/S Kec International Ltd
Date of order
23 Sep 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/1289/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 8 ,Mumbai v. M/S Kec International Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is, therefore, 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.1289 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. KEC International Ltd...Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant.
Mr.Nitesh Joshi with L.V.Bomner i/b. M/s. Shaunak Satpute & Co. for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2009.
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue. He fairly states that the so far as the first question is concerned, the same is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of Premier Automobile V/s. Income TaxOfficer & Ors. reported in 264 ITR 193, whereas the third question is concerned, it is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT V/s.Parle Biscuit Ltd. reported in [2006] 282 ITR 547 (Bom.) against the revenue.
2.So far as the second question is concerned, we find that the said question sought to be raised is nothing but a finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal based on the appreciation of evidence with which no fault can be found. In totality, no substantial question of law is involved in the appeal. The appeal is, therefore, 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.