Itxa/4552/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax I Pune v. Apoorva Properties Sand Estates Pv T Ltd
High Court
22 Feb 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/4552/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax I Pune v. Apoorva Properties Sand Estates Pv T Ltd
Date of order
22 Feb 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/4552/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax I Pune v. Apoorva Properties Sand Estates Pv T Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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 (LOD NO.4552 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Pune
..Appellant.
V/s.
Apporva Properties & Estates Pvt. Ltd...Respondent.
Mr. Vimal Gupta for appellant.
Mr P.J. Pardiwala, senior Advocate i/b. ALMT Legal for respondent.
P.C. :-
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.DATED : 22ND FEBRUARY, 2011
1.The above appeal was dismissed on 6/11/2009 for non removal of objections. By consent, the appeal is restored to file and taken up for admission.
2.Counsel on both the sides agree that the questions sought to be raised in the appeal are covered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee by the judgment of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.1194 of 2010 [CIT V/s. Brahma Associates] decided by us today i.e. 22/02/2011. Accordingly, the aforesaid questions are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The appeal is disposed off accordingly with no order as to costs.
(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, 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.