Itxa/552/2004 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri H.k. Chandani
High Court
16 Jul 2007 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/552/2004 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri H.k. Chandani
Date of order
16 Jul 2007
Assessment year(s)
1988-1989
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/552/2004 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri H.k. Chandani, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In the light of that, Appeal stands 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.552 OF 2004
The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Appellant.
V/s.
Shri H.K. Chandani .. Respondent.
Mr.R. Asokan i/by Pankaj Kapoor for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &
J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 16TH JULY, 2007.
P.C. :
1. The Revenue had preferred this Appeal
impugning the order dated 17th September, 2003 in ITA
No.330/9/Mum/92. That appeal was preferred against
the order of CIT (Appeals)(xx), Bombay dated
14-02-1992 for the A.Y. 1988-1989.
2. We have gone through the impugned order and
after considering the judgment, in our opinion there
are concurrent findings of fact recorded both by the
CIT (Appeals) as well as by I.T.A.T. Nothing has
been pointed out to us to show that the findings are
perverse.
3. The substantial questions of law formulated
in this Appeal do not arise at all. In the light of
that, Appeal stands dismissed with no order as to
costs.
(F.I. REBELLO, 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.
EaseValue