Itxa/2122/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -9, Mumbai v. M/S. Indo Biotech Foods Ltd Mumbai
High Court
30 Nov 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/2122/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -9, Mumbai v. M/S. Indo Biotech Foods Ltd Mumbai
Date of order
30 Nov 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/2122/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -9, Mumbai v. M/S. Indo Biotech Foods Ltd Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Both the appeals are dismissed in limini 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.2122 OF 2009ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2302 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. Indo Biotech Foods Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr. J.S. Saluja for appellant.
Mr. S.J. Mehta for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 30TH NOVEMBER, 2009.
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue and the learned counsel for the respondent. Perused appeals.
2.The view taken by the Tribunal is in consonance with the view taken by this Court. The relevant judgments are quoted in the order of the Tribunal. The learned counsel for the revenue in order to distinguish the said judgments relied upon the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Prithviraj Bhoorchand reported in [2006] 152 Taxman 372 (Guj) and another Judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of R & P Exports V/s. CIT reported in [2005] 146 Taxman 404 (ALL) with which we do not concur.
3.The Tribunal has taken a view similar to the one taken by this
Court CIT V/s. Hari Synthetic Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. reported in [1986] 26 Taxman 540 (Bom) and CIT V/s. Ormerods (I) (P) Ltd. reported in [1989] 42 Taxman 081 (Bom), referred in its order with which we agree.
4.So far as another appeal is concerned, the said matter was restored back to AO to decide the assessee's claim on depreciation on additions made to the fixed assets afresh. In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law arise in the appeals. Both the appeals are dismissed in limini with no order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(V.C.DAGA, 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.