Itxa/1437/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9 v. M/S. Stonewall Developers Pvt.ltd
High Court
31 Oct 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1437/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9 v. M/S. Stonewall Developers Pvt.ltd
Date of order
31 Oct 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itxa/1437/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9 v. M/S. Stonewall Developers Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1437 OF 2012
…
Commissioner of Income Tax-9
...Appellant
v/s.M/s.Stonewall Developers Pvt.Ltd.
...Respondent
…
Mr.Arvind Pinto for the Appellant.None for the Respondent. ...
CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATED : 31 OCTOBER 2014
P.C.:
Having heard Mr.Pinto, learned Counsel appearing for
the Revenue and perusing, with his assistance, the order of the Tribunal, we do not find that it raises any substantial question of law. All that the Tribunal has held is that the Assessee has placed some material before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, that is not only material on which the conclusion of the Commissioner is based. In such circumstances, this not a matter giving rise to a question and substantial one, particularly of interpretation of Rule 46-A of the I.T.Rules, 1961.
2.The Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. It is, accordingly, 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.