Itxa/1891/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Central -Ii v. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd
High Court
31 Jul 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1891/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Central -Ii v. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd
Date of order
31 Jul 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Itxa/1891/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Central -Ii v. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
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 (L) NO.276 OF 2006
Commissioner of Income-tax,
Central II, Mumbai - 20 ..Appellant
V/s.
Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
Mr.Yogesh Patke with Mr.B.M. Chatterjee for the
Appellant.
Mr.S.M. Shah for the Respondent.
CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 31ST JULY, 2008
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for both the sides.
2. The first contention urged is in relation
to the retention money, but it is an admitted fact
that the retention money was shown as income in the
subsequent year and was assessed to tax and that
finding has been accepted by the department.
Therefore, there is no substance in the first
contention.
3. The second contention is about the
machinery of the assessee which was lying in Iraq
and Malawi. According to the department,
depreciation of this machinery has been wrongly
allowed. It is clear from the order that this view
has been taken by the tribunal in the peculiar
circumstances prevailing in Iraq and Malawi.
4. In our opinion, therefore, as the view
has been taken in peculiar facts, it will not be
proper to interfere with the impugned order. The
appeal is dismissed.
D.K. DESHMUKH, J.
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.