Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/2347/2010 Of Thecommissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/2347/2010 Of Thecommissioner Of Incometax-3,Mum v. M/S Unicome Trading Enterprises L. Ltd

High Court 23 Jan 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/2347/2010 Of Thecommissioner Of Incometax-3,Mum v. M/S Unicome Trading Enterprises L. Ltd
Date of order
23 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itxa/2347/2010 Of Thecommissioner Of Incometax-3,Mum v. M/S Unicome Trading Enterprises L. Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is therefore, dismissed for theaforesaid reasons.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1010 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax-3,..AppellantMumbai V/s. M/s.Unicom Trading Co. Pvt.Ltd...Respondent Mr.Vimal Gupta & Mr.P.S.Sahadevan, Advocate, forAppellantMr.J.D.Mistry with Mr.Raj Darak, Advocate, forRespondent CORAM : F.I.REBELLO &R.S.MOHITE,JJ. DATE : 23RD JANUARY, 2008 P.C. .The first two questions which have beenraised in this appeal are answered by us againstrevenue by a separate Judgment and Order deliveredby us today in Income Tax Appeal No.56/2005. Thetwo questions therefore, do not survive. The thirdquestion also stands answered by a Division Benchon 17[th] October, 2007 by the Judgment and Orderdelivered by this Court in ITA No.1139/M/2002 inthe case of the Commissioner of Income-tax-3 V/s.M/s.Akshay Textiles Trading. In the circumstances, none of the substantial question of law, as framedarise. The appeal is therefore, dismissed for theaforesaid reasons. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, 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