Itxa/1684/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Vii, Mumbai v. M/S Pankaj Piyush Trade And Investment Ltd
High Court
07 Sep 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1684/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Vii, Mumbai v. M/S Pankaj Piyush Trade And Investment Ltd
Date of order
07 Sep 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itxa/1684/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Vii, Mumbai v. M/S Pankaj Piyush Trade And Investment Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Both the appeals are dismissed in limini with no order as to costs.
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.1207 OF 2009
AND
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1684 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. Pankaj Piyush Trade & Investment Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant.
Mr. B.V. Jhaveri for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 7TH SEPTEMBER, 2009.
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue and learned counsel appearing for the respondent. The question sought to raised in the appeals revolve around the justification in allowing the proportionate interest of Rs.7,69,46, 388/- disallowed on the value of shares invested. The Tribunal has considered this aspect in paragraph 6.1 of its order and has recorded a finding of fact after appreciation of evidence with which we find no fault.
2.So far as the second question regarding deletion the addition of Rs.5,15,65,105/- is concerned, the Tribunal has confirmed the order of CIT(A) wherein CIT(A) had observed as under:-
" ....Accordingly, I am of the opinion that there is no ground for making any addition on account of unsecured loans as the genuineness of the transactions, identity of the payee and credit worthiness of the creditors have already been established. The addition of Rs.5,15,65,105/- is deleted. "
3.In the above view of the matter, one cannot find fault with the findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal after appreciation of evidence. No substantial question of law arise in these appeals. Both the appeals are 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.