In Itxa/1772/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Mumbai v. M/S. Guru Holding P. Ltd. Mumbai, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
Decision: Appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of substantial question of law 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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1772 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income-tax.
... Appellant.
M/s.Guru Holdings P.Ltd.
... Respondent.
P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant.
Pankaj R. Toprani for the respondent.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused impugned order.
2.The questions of law sought to be raised in the appeal does not arise from the impugned order. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, 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