Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/1895/2009 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/1895/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central-Iii, Mumbai v. M/S. Blow Plast Ltd

High Court 01 Dec 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1895/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central-Iii, Mumbai v. M/S. Blow Plast Ltd
Date of order
01 Dec 2008
Assessment year(s)
1996-97
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itxa/1895/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central-Iii, Mumbai v. M/S. Blow Plast Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Accordingly, the the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AGK ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2487 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central - III, Mumbai ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Blow Plast Limited ..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant. Mr.A.K. Jasani for the respondent. CORAM : P.B. MAJMUDAR & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 1ST DECEMBER, 2008 P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for both the sides. 2. In so far as question of law (A) is concerned, relating to deleting disallowance of foreign travelling expenses of the Directors and employees, we have dismissed Income Tax Appeal (L) No.1260 of 2005. 3. In so far as question of law (B) is concerned, the said issue is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court reported in 245 ITR 203. Hence, question of law (B) does not survive. 4. In so far as question of law (C) is concerned, the same is in connection with deleting additions on account of interest accrued on advances made to media corporation. The tribunal relied on assessee’s own case for A.Y. 1996-97, against which revenue has not filed any appeal. 5. In so far as question of law (D) is concerned, the same is in connection with deleting additions on account of late deposit of ESIC payments. This issue is squarely covered by the decision in Income Tax Appeal No.14 of 2000 dated 25-11-2000. 6. In this view of the matter, none of the questions raised by the revenue can be said be substantial questions of law. Accordingly, the the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (P.B. Majmudar, 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