In Itxa/2863/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -8 v. Saurashtra Ballpen Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Decision: Revenuehas preferred an appeal against the order of theTribunal which has confirmed the findings recordedby the Commissioner of Appeals.
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 JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG.) NO.869 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income- ... ... AppellantTax, Mumbai.
M/s Saurashtra Ball Pen... ... RespondentsPvt. Ltd., Mumbai
Mr. S.M. Shah with Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for Appellant.Mr. M.M. Vaidya for Respondents.
.Appeal heard forthwith.
formulated in Para 6 of the Appeal Memo. Revenuehas preferred an appeal against the order of theTribunal which has confirmed the findings recordedby the Commissioner of Appeals.
Tribunal, we find that the Tribunal had relied onthe order of Assessment Year 1986 - 1987 which wasupheld by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 4951 of1992. The Appeal Memo does not disclose whetherany appeal was preferred against the said order.
4)In our opinion, these are purely findingsof fact. The questions of law does not arise,more so as the Tribunal relied on the order of theAssessment Year 1986 - 1987.
5)In the light of that, no interference iscalled for. Appeal dismissed.
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.
EaseValue