Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/1573/2012 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/1573/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 25, Mumbai v. Shri Chhitubhai N.patel

High Court 04 Dec 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1573/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 25, Mumbai v. Shri Chhitubhai N.patel
Date of order
04 Dec 2014
Assessment year(s)
2006-07
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/1573/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 25, Mumbai v. Shri Chhitubhai N.patel, 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.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1573 OF 2012 … The Commissioner of Income Tax-25v/s.Shri Chhitubhai N. Patel ...Appellant ...Respondent … Mr.Arvind Pinto for the Appellant.Mr.Deepak Tralshawala i/b Mr.Vishnu Hadade for the Respondent. ... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 4 DECEMBER 2014 P.C. This Appeal challenges the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 16 May 2012 in Income Tax Appeal No.3361/Mum/2011. The Assessment Year in question is 2008-09. 2.In dismissing the Revenue's Appeal the Tribunal followed its order passed for prior Assessment Year 2006-07, where same issues were decided in favour of the Assessee on 20 December 2010 in Income Tax Appeal No.5238 of 2009. The Tribunal's order in that regard and passed on 20 December 2010 was challenged by the Revenue by filing an Appeal in this Court. That Appeal of the Revenue was dismissed by this Court on 5 August 2011 being Income Tax Appeal (L) No.686 of 2011. This Court dismissed the Appeal of the Revenue following the judgment rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. Gopal Purohit, reported in (2010) 228 CTR (Bom.) 582. 3.If the Tribunal has followed its earlier order pertaining to the same issue and same Assessee and applied it to the identical facts of the present Assessment Year, then, we do not see any perversity being committed by the Tribunal. Its order is also not vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record. 4.This Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan