In Itxa/556/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -I , Pune v. Mahesh Sahakari Bank Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeals are, therefore, dismissed in limini 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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.926 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax..Appellant.Janaseva Sahakari Bank Ltd...Respondent.AND
V/s.
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.932 OF 2008
The Commissioner of Income Tax..Appellant.Mahesh Sahakari Bank Ltd...Respondent.
V/s.
Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant.None for respondent.
CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 18TH JUNE, 2009.
P.C. :-
1.Heard learned counsel for the revenu. Office
objections stand overruled. Registry is directed to register the appeals.
2.The appeals are taken up for hearing at the
request of learned counsel for revenue. He fairly
states that the issue sought to be raised in the above appeals are covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of Income Tax Appeal No.46 of 2008 decided on 16/6/2008[CIT V/s. The Solapur Nagari Audyogic Sahakari Bank Ltd. A/w. other matters]. In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law arise in these appeals. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed in limini with no order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, 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.