Case Law › High Court › Itxa/355/2004 Of Comm. Of Income-Tax, Iv...

Itxa/355/2004 Of Comm. Of Income-Tax, Iv, Thane v. Bhishamlal P. Ahuja

High Court 22 Nov 2005 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · newos

Parties

Date of order

22 Nov 2005

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/355/2004 Of Comm. Of Income-Tax, Iv, Thane v. Bhishamlal P. Ahuja, the High Court (2005) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.355 OF 2004 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.355 OF 2004 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. Shri Bhishamlal P. Ahuja ..Respondent. Mr.Parag Vyas for appellant. Mr.Jitendra Jain i/b. R.M.G. Law Associates for appellant. CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE AND CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 22ND NOVEMBER, 2005. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 22ND NOVEMBER, 2005. P.C. :- P.C. :- Heard Mr.Parag Vayas for the appellant. Mr.Jain appears for the respondent. The question sought to be raised has no relevance to the assessment year 1984-85 concerning which the impugned order has been passed. The question sought to be raised does not arise from the impugned order. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. (H.L.GOKHALE, J.) (H.L.GOKHALE, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, 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.