Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/501/2004 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/501/2004 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Tdc Mumbai v. M/S Su-Raj Diamonds (I) Mumbai

High Court 08 Jan 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/501/2004 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Tdc Mumbai v. M/S Su-Raj Diamonds (I) Mumbai
Date of order
08 Jan 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Itxa/501/2004 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Tdc Mumbai v. M/S Su-Raj Diamonds (I) Mumbai, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.

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 JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.501 OF 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.501 OF 2004 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Su-Raj Diamonds (India) Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.A.Kotangale i/b. Mr.Pankaj Kapoor for appellant. Mr.Atul K.Jasani for respondent. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 8TH JANUARY, 2007. DATED : 8TH JANUARY, 2007. P.C. :- P.C. :- Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. In view of the Circular issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Revenue Department dated 24/10/2005, we are not inclined to admit this appeal as the tax effect involved is less than Rs.2 lakhs. (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan