Itxa/4272/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -5 Mumbai v. Luky Star Jewellery Exports I Pvt Ltd
High Court
30 Nov 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/4272/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -5 Mumbai v. Luky Star Jewellery Exports I Pvt Ltd
Date of order
30 Nov 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itxa/4272/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -5 Mumbai v. Luky Star Jewellery Exports I Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
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.4272 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax-5
..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. Lucky Star Jewellery Exports (I) Pvt. Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for appellant.
Ms. A. Vissanji with S.J. Mehta for respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND R.M. SAVANT, JJ.
DATED : 30TH NOVEMBER, 2010
P.C. :-
1.The question of law raised by the revenue in this appeal, reads as under:-
" Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in holding the order of the CIT (A) and directing the assessing officer to allow assessee's claim under section 10A of the Act reducing 16.33% against 31.19% considered by the assessing officer originally ? "
The exemption under section 10A of the Income Tax Act,
1961 was sought to be denied on the ground that the assessee has outsourced the manufacturing activity. The Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that substantial part of the manufacturing activity was in fact carried on by the assessee company and only some portion of the manufacturing activity was out sourced. In our opinion, the decision of the Tribunal is based on finding of fact and no question of law arise. The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(R.M. SAVANT, 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.