Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/333/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/333/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9, Mumbai v. M/S Phase Holding Pvt. Ltd

High Court 20 Jun 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/333/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9, Mumbai v. M/S Phase Holding Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
20 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/333/2006 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 9, Mumbai v. M/S Phase Holding Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In this view of the matter, the Appeal is not maintainable and is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax-9 .. Appellant V/s. M/s.Phase Holding Pvt.Ltd.,Mumbai .. Respondent Mr.Vinod Gupta for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND P.C.:- P.C.:- . This Appeal is filed by the Department against an order by the Appellate Tribunal dated 23rd December, 2005 in an Appeal against the said order. The question of law framed in paragraph 4(a) by the department is as under : a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in rejecting the appeal of the department on the 2 assumption that the valuation is done by the department was purely on estimate basis when in fact the valuation is done on the basis of material supplied by the assessee and the same is based on various submissions / details furnished by the assessee. 2. We have gone through the records. We have also heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Department and we find that there is no question of law involved, as a matter of fact question relate to amounts that were spent by the assessee for the construction. The department did not produce the books of account, estimated value on the basis of information received by the department either from the assessee or from the other sources. 3. In this view of the matter, the Appeal is not maintainable and is dismissed. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, 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