Itxa/2115/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 v. Reclamation Properties (I) Pvt. Ltd
High Court
14 Aug 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/2115/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 v. Reclamation Properties (I) Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
14 Aug 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/2115/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-10 v. Reclamation Properties (I) Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: These Appeals are, therefore, dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
sbw
*1*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2115 OF 2011WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2116 OF 2011WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2161 OF 2011WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2447 OF 2011
Commissioner of Income Tax-10
..Appellant
-Versus-Reclamation Properties (India)Pvt.Ltd.
..Respondent
...........
Mr. P. C. Chhotaray for the Appellant.
Ms. A. Vissanjee with Mr. S. J. Mehta for the Respondent.
...........
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
AND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.
DATE :- 14[th] August, 2014
P.C.:
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length, we find that the questions of law at page 5 of the memo of appeal cannot be said to be substantial questions of law and each of them are covered by our judgment delivered on 8[th] August, 2014 in Income Tax Appeal No.1213 of 2011 along with connected Appeals. These Appeals are, therefore, dismissed. No costs.
(B.P.COLABAWALLA, J.)
(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, 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.