Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/396/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/396/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 7, Mumbai v. M/S Sunita Pipes Pvt. Ltd

High Court 11 Jan 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/396/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 7, Mumbai v. M/S Sunita Pipes Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
11 Jan 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/396/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 7, Mumbai v. M/S Sunita Pipes Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: DATED : 11TH JANUARY, 2011 P.C. :- 1.A short question raised in this appeal is, whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions made in the hands of the assessee when in fact the very same amount has been offered to tax and accepted in the hands of two Directors i.e A.K.

Decision: In this view of the matter, we see no merit in the appeal and hence the same is dismissed 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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.396 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax-7..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Sunita Pipes Pvt...Respondent. Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant. Mr. A.K. Jasani for respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : 11TH JANUARY, 2011 P.C. :- 1.A short question raised in this appeal is, whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions made in the hands of the assessee when in fact the very same amount has been offered to tax and accepted in the hands of two Directors i.e A.K. Bhatia and R.K. Bhatia. It is not disputed that the amount sought to be taxed in the hands of the assessee has already been taxed in the hands of A.K. Bhatia and R.K. Bhatia and the said order has attained finaility. In this view of the matter, we see no merit in the appeal and hence the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan