Itxa/310/2004 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai City-Ii Mumbai v. M/S. Borax Morarji Ltd. Mumbai
High Court
24 Oct 2005 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/310/2004 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai City-Ii Mumbai v. M/S. Borax Morarji Ltd. Mumbai
Date of order
24 Oct 2005
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/310/2004 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai City-Ii Mumbai v. M/S. Borax Morarji Ltd. Mumbai, the High Court (2005) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Both the appeals are, therefore, dismissed in limine 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
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.310 OF 2004
AND
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.506 OF 2004
The Commissioner of Income-tax,
Mumbai City - II .. Appellant.
V/s.
M/s.Borax Morarji Ltd. .. Respondent.
Mr.Ashok Kotangale for the appellant.
Mr.M. Subramaniam with Mr.V.S. Hadade for the
respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 24TH OCTOBER, 2005.
P.C. :
1. It is brought to the notice of this Court that
the Tribunal has relied upon the assessment order of
the very same Tribunal for assessment years, 1988-89,
1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92. No appeals have been filed by the Revenue to challenge the said order. As a matter of fact, we find that for assessment year
1988-89 the order has been accepted by the Revenue and
no appeal has been filed as yet.
2. In this view of the matter if the Revenue has
accepted the order of the Tribunal for earlier
assessment years and if the Tribunal has relied upon
2
those orders, we see no infirmity in the impugned
order. These appeals, therefore, can hardly gives
rise to any question of law especially in absence of
any explanation as to why the present appeal was filed
when earlier assessment orders has been accepted by
the Revenue.
3. Both the appeals are, therefore, dismissed in
limine with no order as to costs.
(V.C. DAGA, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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.