In Itxa/1553/2007 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -11, Mumbai v. Mr. Roosi K. Modi, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 30th July, 2009, for the reasons stated therein these two appeals are also dismissed.
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.600 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellant.
V/s.
Mrs. Manek B. Cooper
..Respondent.
None for appellant.
Mr. Jitendra Jain with A.K. Jasani and P.C. Tripathi for respondent.
AND
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1553 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellant.
V/s.
Mr. Roosi K. Modi
..Respondent.
Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant.
None for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED; 30TH JULY, 2009
P. C. :-
Counsel on both the sides agree that the questions raised in these appeals are similar to the questions raised in Income Tax Appeal No.292 of 2009 in the case of CIT V/s. Mrs. Roosi K. Modi. Since the said Income Tax Appeal No.292 of 2009 is dismissed by us today i.e. 30th July, 2009, for the reasons stated therein these two appeals are also dismissed.
(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.
EaseValue