Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/1993/2009 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/1993/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 Mumbai v. M/S. Jhavar Properties Pvt Ltd Mumbai

High Court 05 Oct 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1993/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 Mumbai v. M/S. Jhavar Properties Pvt Ltd Mumbai
Date of order
05 Oct 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Itxa/1993/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-9 Mumbai v. M/S. Jhavar Properties Pvt Ltd Mumbai, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.

Decision: 5.The appeal is disposed of accordingly 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 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1993 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Jhavar Properties Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Ms. Suchitra Kamble for appellant. Mr.Subhash S. Shetty for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 5TH OCTOBER, 2009. P.C. :- 1.Heard learned counsel for the rival parties. The appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law:- “ Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relying upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in Dilip N. Shroff V/s. JCIT 291 ITR 519 (SC) which was subsequently disapproved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. V/s. Dharmendra Textiles Processors & Ors. (2008) reported in 306 ITR 277 ? “ 2.The appeal is taken up for final hearing by consent of the parties. Both parties agree that since the Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff V/s. JCIT reported in 291 ITR 519 (SC), the impugned order is set aside without going into the merits and demerits of the matter since the judgment of Dilip N. Shroff (supra) is set aside by the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. V/s. Dharmendra Textiles Processors & Ors. reported in (2008) 306 ITR 277 and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for consideration afresh in the light of the law down in Dharmendra Textiles (supra). 3.The Tribunal is expected to decide the appeal afresh following the principles of natural justice and by giving a reasoned order. 4.All contentions of the parties are kept open. 5.The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, 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