Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/275/2006 Of Commissioner Of Income-...

Itxa/275/2006 Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Central-Ii v. M/S Bhatt Production

High Court 10 Jul 2006 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/275/2006 Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Central-Ii v. M/S Bhatt Production
Date of order
10 Jul 2006
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itxa/275/2006 Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Central-Ii v. M/S Bhatt Production, the High Court (2006) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Whether the ITAT was justified in law in upholding the action of the CIT (A) in deleting the disallowance u/s.80-I quantified at Rs.6,53,252/- ?

Decision: In the result, appeal is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.275 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.275 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Bhatt Production ..Respondent. Mr.Shiv Muturiya for appellant. Dr.K.Shivram with Ajay Singh for respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 10TH JULY, 2006. P.C.: Heard rival parties. The appellant has raised the following substantial questions of law:- 1. Whether the ITAT was justified in law in upholding the action of the CIT (A) in deleting the disallowance u/s.80-I quantified at Rs.6,53,252/- ? 2. Whether profits from production of film are entitled to deduction u/s.80-1 of the Act ? Both parties submit that the issue sought to be raised, common in both questions is covered against the revenue in view of the Judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax V/s. D.K. Kondke Commissioner of Income-Tax V/s. D.K. Kondke192 I.T.R. 128. Thus, no substantial reported in 192 I.T.R. 128 question of law is involved in the appeal. In the result, appeal is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs. (V.C. DAGA, J.) (V.C. DAGA, 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