Itxa/49/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-19,Mum v. Padma I. Jashani
High Court
25 Jun 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/49/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-19,Mum v. Padma I. Jashani
Date of order
25 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/49/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax-19,Mum v. Padma I. Jashani, the High Court (2008) 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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 49 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income-tax-19,Piramal Chambers, Parel,Mumbai - 400 012.
... Appellant.
V/s.
Smt. Padma Ishwar Jashnani,701, Gulmohar Apartments,54, Auxillium Convent Road,Pali Hill, Bandra - West,Mumbai - 400 050.
... Respondent.
...
Mr. R.G. Bhatt for the Appellant.Mr. K. Gopal with Mr. Jitendra Singh for theRespondents.
of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Shamlal Balram
Gurbani (2001) 249 ITR 501 (Bom.).
-:2:-
the assessee were disclosed. We have perused theJudgement of ITAT and CIT. We do not find that either
before CIT(A) or ITAT, the Judgment of this Court was
sought to be distinguished on that time.
3.Considering that CIT(A) and ITAT have reliedon the Judgement of this Court, the question of law
does not arise and consequently, the Appeal isdismissed.
(F.I. REBELLO, J.)
(K.U. CHANDIWAL,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.