Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/1856/2010 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/1856/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5 ,Mumbai v. M/S Standard Batteries Ltd

High Court 11 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1856/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5 ,Mumbai v. M/S Standard Batteries Ltd
Date of order
11 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/1856/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5 ,Mumbai v. M/S Standard Batteries Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.

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 ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.2041 OF 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.2041 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Standard Batteriesd Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.R.Ashokan with P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. Mr.Nishant Thakkar i/b. Diren Shah for respondent. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 11TH APRIL, 2008. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 11TH APRIL, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the I.T.A.T. order dated 22/12/2006. The Tribunal has merely remanded the matter back to the assessing officer. In view thereof, there is no substantial question of law involved. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)(DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, 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