Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/3041/2009 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/3041/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -8 Mumbai v. Ruppppen Investmdent And Inds. Pvt Ltd

High Court 04 Feb 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/3041/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -8 Mumbai v. Ruppppen Investmdent And Inds. Pvt Ltd
Date of order
04 Feb 2010
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Itxa/3041/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -8 Mumbai v. Ruppppen Investmdent And Inds. Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: All the above appeals are dismissed.

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 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3037 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Rita Chokshi Holding P. Ltd. ..Respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3041 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Ruppen Investment & Inds. Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3151 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Tru Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant. Mr. Niraj Sheth with Rajesh Poojari i/b. Mint & Conferes for respondent. CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2010 P.C. :- 1.The I.T.A.T. has relied upon its order dated 18th July, 2007 in M/s. Castle Investment & Inds. Pvt. Ltd. V/s. ITO [ITA NO.1713/Mum/2006] and the order passed by a Division Bench order of this Court on 22[nd] July, 2008 confirming the said judgment of the Tribunal in Income Tax appeal No.1557 of 2007. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents states that the issue raised in the above appeals pertaining to the interpretation of section 115 O(5) is covered by the decisions referred above. Counsel for the revenue does not dispute this position. In view of this position, no substantial question of law would arise. All the above appeals are dismissed. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, 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